/£./3,// 


from  1 0e  £t6rare  of 

(Ret),  (gtffen  jE)enrg  (grotwi,  ©.  ©. 

(jgcqueaf^eo  fig  #m  *° 
f0c  &t6rarg  of 

(prtncefon  tfleofogicaf  Jlemindrg 

sec 

*3 


THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES: 

"Or 


*      DEC  13  1911 
&  Utcto  of  tljr     \^ 

r"££$/ML  sew 


%^/cii  sti\^y 


EVIDENCES,  DOCTRINES,  MORALS  AND  INSTITUTIONS 


CHRISTIANITY 


BY  RICHARD  WATSON. 


THEOLOGIZE  autem  objectum  est  ipse  Deus. — Habent  aliae  omnes  scienliae  sua  objecta, 
nobilia  certe,  et  digna  in  quibus  humana  mens  considerandis  tempus,  otium,  et  diligen- 
tiam  adhibeat.  Hsec  una  circa  Ens  entium  et  Causam  causarum,  circa  Principiwm 
naturse,  et  gratia;  in  natura  existentis,  natura;  adsistentis,  et  naturam  circumsistciiiis 
versatur.  Dignissimum  itaquc  hoc  est  Objectum  et^plenum  veneranda)  Majestatis,  prx 
■jellensque  reliquis. 

ARMINIUS. 


VOL.    III. 


NEW-YORK, 

PUBLISHED  BY  J.  EMORY  AND  B.  WAUGH,  FOR  THE  METHODIST 

EPISCOPAL  CHURCH,  AT  THE  CONFERENCE  OFFICE, 

14  CROSBY-STREET. 


James  Collord,  Printer. 

182*. 


PART  SECOND. 

CONTINUED. 

DOCTRINES  OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES. 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

Extent  of  the  Atonement. 

We  have  already  spoken  of  some  of  the  leading  blessings  derived 
to  man  from  the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  conditions  on  which  they 
&re  made  attainable.  Before  the  remainder  are  adduced,  it  may 
be  here  a  proper  place  to  inquire  into  the  extent  of  that  atonement 
for  sin  made  by  the  death  of  our  Saviour,  and  whether  the  blessings 
of  justification,  regeneration,  and  adoption,  are  rendered  attainable 
by  all  to  whom  the  Gospel  is  proclaimed. 

This  inquiry  leads  us  into  what  is  called  the  Calvinistic  contro- 
versy ;  a  controversy  which  has  always  been  conducted  with  great 
ardour,  and  sometimes  with  intemperance.  I  shall  endeavour  to 
consider  such  parts  of  it  as  are  comprehended  in  the  question  before 
us,  with  perfect  calmness  and  fairness ;  recollecting,  on  the  one 
hand,  how  many  excellent  and  learned  men  have  been  arranged  on 
each  side  ;  and,  on  the  other,  that,  whilst  all  honour  is  due  to  great, 
names,  the  plain  and  unsophisticated  sense  of  the  Word  of  inspired 
Truth  must  alone  decide  on  a  subject  with  respect  to  which  it  is 
not  silent. 

In  the  system  usually  called  by  the  name  of  Calvinism,  and  which 
shall  subsequently  be  exhibited  in  its  different  modifications,  there 
are,  I  think,  many  great  errors  ;  but  they  have  seldom  been  held 
except  in  connexion  with  a  class  of  vital  truths.  By  many  writers 
who  have  attacked  this  system,  the  truth  which  it  contains,  as  well 
as  the  error,  has  often  been  invaded  ;  and  the  assault  itself  has  been 
not  unfrequently  conducted  on  principles  exceedingly  anti-scriptural, 
and  fatally  delusive.  These  considerations  are  sufficient  to  inspire 
caution.  The  controversy  is  a  very  voluminous  one  ;  and  yet  no 
great  dexterity  is  required  to  exhibit  it  with  clearness  in  a  compara- 
tively small  compass.  Its  essence  lies  in  very  limited  bounds  ;  and, 
according  to  the  plan  of  this  work,  the  whole  question  will  be  tested, 
litst  and  chiefly,  by  scriptural  authority.     High  Calvinism,  indeed, 


4  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

affects  the  mode  of  reasoning  a  priori,  and  delights  in  metaphysics. 
To  some  also  it  gives  most  delight  to  see  it  opposed  on  the  same 
ground ;  and  to  such  disputants  it  will  be  much  less  imposing  to 
resort  primarily,  and  with  all  simplicity,  to  the  testimony  of  the 
Sacred  Writings.  "  It  is  sometimes  complained,"  says  one,  "  that 
the  mind  is  unduly  biassed  in  its  judgment,  by  a  continual  reference 
to  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures.  The  complaint  is  just,  if  the 
Scriptures  are  not  the  Word  of  God  :  but  if  they  are,  there  is  an 
opposite  and  corresponding  danger  to  be  guarded  against,  that  of 
suffering  the  mind  to  be  unduly  biassed  in  the  study  and  interpret- 
ation of  the  revealed  ,will  of  God,  by  the  deductions  of  unaided 
reason."(l) 

With  respect  to  the  controversy,  we  may  also  observe,  that  it 
forms  a  clear  case  of  appeal  to  the  Scriptures :  for  to  whom  the. 
benefits  of  Christ's  death  are  extended,  whether  to  the  whole  of  our 
race,  or  to  a  part,  can  be  matter  of  revelation  only  ;  and  the  sole 
province  of  reason  is  that  of  interpreting,  with  fairness,  and  consist- 
ently with  the  acknowledged  principles  of  that  revelation,  those 
parts  of  it  in  which  the  subject  is  directly  or  incidentally  introduced. 

The  question  before  us,  put  into  its  most  simple  form,  is,  whether 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  did  so  die  for  all  men,  as  to  make  salvation 
attainable  by  all  men ;  and  the  affirmative  of  this  question  is,  we 
think,  the  doctrine  of  Scripture. 

We  assume  that  this  is  plainly  expressed, 

1.  In  all  those  passages  which  declare  that  Christ  died  "for  all 
men,"  and  speak  of  his  death  as  an  atonement  for  the  sins  "  of  the 
whole  world." 

We  have  already  seen,  in  treating  of  our  Lord's  atonement,  in 
what  sense  the  phrase,  to  die  "for  us,"  must  be  understood ;  that 
it  signifies  to  die  in  the  place  and  stead  of  man,  as  a  sacrificial  obla- 
tion, by  which  satisfaction  is  made  for  the  sins  of  the  individual,  so 
that  they  become  remissible  upon  the  terms  of  the  evangelical 
covenant.  When,  therefore,  it  is  said,  that  Christ  "  by  the  grace 
of  God  tasted  death  for  every  man  ;"  and  that  "he  is  the  propitia- 
tion for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  only,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world ;"  it  can  only,  we  think,  be  fairly  concluded  from  such 
declarations,  and  from  many  other  familiar  texts,  in  which  the  same 
phraseology  is  employed,  that,  by  the  death  of  Christ,  the  sins  of 
every  man  are  rendered  remissible,  and  that  salvation  is  consequently 
attainable  by  every  man.  Again,  our  Lord  calls  himself  "the 
Saviour  of  the  world ;"  and  is,  by  St.  Paul,  called  "  the  Saviour  of 
all  men."  John  the  Baptist  points  him  out  as  "the  Lamb  of  God 
(l)  Dr.  Whiteley's  Essays 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  0 

which  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world ;"  and  our  Lord  himself 
declares,  "  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  Ms  only-begotten 
Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have 
everlasting  life  :  for  God  sent  not  his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn 
the  world ;  but  that  the  world  through  him  might  be  saved."  So, 
also,  the  apostle  Paul,  "  God  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world 
unto  himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses  unto  them." 

2.  Jn  those  passages  which  attribute  an  equal  extent  to  the  effects 
of  the  death  of  Christ  as  to  the  effects  of  the  fall  of  our  first  parents. 
"  For  if  through  the  offence  of  one  many  be  dead,  much  more  the 
grace  of  God,  and  the  gift  by  grace,  which  is  by  one  man,  Jesus 
Christ,  hath  abounded  unto  many.''''  "  Therefore,  as  by  the  offence 
of  one  judgment  came  upon  all  men  to  condemnation  ;  even  so  by 
the  righteousness  of  one  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  unto  justi- 
fication of  life."  (2) 

As  the  unlimited  extent  of  Christ's  atonement  to  all  mankind,  is 
plainly  expressed  in  the  above  cited  passages,  so  is  it,  we  also  as- 
sume,  necessarily  implied, 

1.  In  those  which  declare  that  Christ  died  not  only  for  those  that 
are  saved,  but  for  those  who  do,  or  may  perish  ;  so  that  it  cannot 
be  argued,  from  the  actual  condemnation  of  men,  that  they  were 
excepted  from  many  actual,  and  from  all  the  offered,  benefits  of  his 
death.  "  And  through  thy  knowledge  shall  thy  weak  brother  perish, 
for  whom  Christ  died.''''  "  Destroy  not  him  with  thy  meat,  for  whom 
Christ  died.''''  "  False  teachers,  who  privily  shall  bring  in  damnable 
heresies,  even  denying  the  Lord  that  bought  them,  and  bring  upon 
themselves  swift  destruction.''''  So  also  in  the  case  of  the  apostates 
mentioned  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  "  Of  how  much  sorer 

(2)  To  these  might  be  added,  all  those  passages  which  ascribe  the  abolition  of 
bodily  death,  to  Christ,  who,  in  this  respect,  repairs  the  effect  of  the  transgression 
of  Adam,  which  he  could  only  do  in  consequence  of  having  redeemed  that  body 
from  the  power  of  the  grave.  This  argument  may  be  thus  stated.  It  is  taught, 
in  Scripture,  that  all  shall  rise  from  the  dead.  It  is  equally  clear  from  the  same 
authority,  that  all  shall  rise  in  consequence  of  the  interposition  of  Christ,  the 
second  Adam,  the  representative  and  Redeemer  of  man — "as  in  Adam  all  die, 
even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive."  It  follows,  therefore,  that  if  the  wicked 
are  raised  from  the  dead,  it  is  in  consequence  of  the  power  which  Christ,  as  Re- 
deemer, acquired  over  them,  and  of  his  right  in  them.  That  this  resurrection  is 
to  them  a  curse,  was  not  in  the  purpose  of  God,  but  arises  from  their  wilful  rejec- 
tion of  the  gospel.  To  be  restored  to  life  is  in  itself  a  good  ;  that  it  is  turned  to 
an  evil  is  their  own  fault ;  and  if  they  are  not  raised  from  the  dead  in  consequence 
of  Christ's  right  in  them,  acquired  by  purchase,  it  behoves  those  of  a  different 
opinion  to  show  under  what  other  constitution  than  that  of  the  gospel,  a  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body  is  provided  for.  The  original  law  contains  no  intimation  of  this, 
nor  of  a  general  judgment,  which  latter  supposes  a  suspension  of  the  sentenco 
inconsistent  with  the  strictly  legal  penalty.  "  in  the  day  thoit  catcst  thereof  thoil 
fihalt  surely  die 


*>  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

punishment,  suppose  ye,  shall  he  be  thought  worthy,  who  hath 
trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  hath  counted  the  blood  of 
the  covenant,  wherewith  he  was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  and  hath 
done  despite  unto  the  Spirit  of  Grace  1"  If  any  dispute  should  here 
arise  as  to  the  phrase,  "  wherewith  he  was  sanctified,"  reference 
may  be  made  to  chap,  vi,  of  the  same  epistle,  where  the  same  class 
of  persons,  whose  doom  is  pronounced  to  be  inevitable,  are  said  to 
have  been  "  once  enlightened ;"  to  have  "  tasted  of  the  heavenly 
gift ;"  to  have  been  "  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  to  have 
"  tasted  the  good  word  of  God,"  and  "  the  powers  of  the  world  to- 
come  :"  all  which  expressions  show  that  they  were  placed  on  the 
same  ground  with  other  Christians  as  to  their  interest  in  the  new 
covenant, — a  point  to  which  we  shall  again  recur. 

2.  In  all  those  passages  which  make  it  the  duty  of  men  to  believe, 
the  Gospel ;  and  place  them  under  guilt,  and  the  penalty  of  death, 
for  rejecting  it.  "  Fie  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting 
life  :  and  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life  ;  but  the 
wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him."  "  But  these  are  written,  that  ye 
might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God ;  and  that 
believing  ye  might  have  life  through  His  name."  "  He  that  believeth 
not  is  condemned  already,  because  he  hath  not  believed  in  the  Name 
of  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God."  "  And  he  said  unto  them,  Go 
ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature.  He 
that  believeth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  believeth 
not,  shall  be  damned."  "  How  shall  we  escape,  if  we  neglect  so  great, 
salvation  1"  "  The  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with 
his  mighty  angels,  in  flaming  fire,  taking  vengeance  on  them  that 
know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  Gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ."  The  plain  argument  from  all  such  passages  is,  that  the 
Gospel  is  commanded  to  be  preached  to  all  men  ;  that  it  is  preached 
to  them  that  they  may  believe  in  Christ,  its  Author  ;  that  this  faith 
is  required  of  them,  in  order  to  their  salvation, — "  that  believing  ye 
may  have  life  through  His  name  ;"  that  they  have  power  thus  to  t 
believe  to  their  salvation ;  (from  whatever  source,  or  by  whatever 
means  this  power  is  derived  to  them,  need  not  now  be  examined  : 
it  is  plainly  supposed  ;  for  not  to  believe,  is  reckoned  to  them  as  a 
capital  crime,  for  which  they  are  condemned  already,  and  reserved 
to  final  condemnation  ;)  and  that  having  power  to  believe,  they  have 
the  power  to  obtain  salvation,  which,  as  it  can  be  bestowed  only 
through  the  merits  of  Christ's  sacrifice,  proves  that  it  extends  to 
them.  The  same  conclusion,  also,  follows  from  the  nature  of  that 
faith,  which  is  required  by  the  Gospel,  in  order  to  salvation.  This, 
wo  have  already  seen,  is  not  m^ro.  assent  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ  V 


SECOND.  ;  iifllOJ.OGH  \\.  INSTI1  f   I  (.-.  '• 

sacrificial  death,  but  personal  trust  in  it  as  our  atonement ;  which 
those,  surely,  could  not  be  required  by  a  Cod  of  truth  to  exercise, 
if  that  atonement  did  not  embrace  them.  Nor  could  they  be  guilty 
for  refusing  to  trust  in  that  which  was  never  intended  to  be  the. 
object  of  their  trust ;  for  if  God  so  designed  to  exclude  them  from 
Christ,  he  could  not  command  them  to  trust  in  Christ ;  and  if  they 
are  not  commanded  thus  to  trust  in  Christ,  they  do  not  violate  any 
command  by  not  believing ;  and,  in  this  respect,  are  innocent. 

3.  In  all  those  passages  in  which  men's  failure  to  obtain  salvation 
is  placed  to  the  account  of  their  own  opposing  wills,  and  made 
wholly  their  own  fault.  "  How  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy 
children  together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her 
wings,  and  ye  icould  not  /"  "  And  ye  anil  not  come  to  me  that  ye 
may  have  life."  "  Bringing  upon  themselves  swift  destruction." 
"  Whosoever  will,  let  him  take  of  the  water  of  life  freely."  It  is 
useless  here  to  multiply  quotations,  since  the  New  Testament  so 
constantly  exhorts  men  to  come  to  Christ,  reproves  them  for  ne- 
glect, and  threatens  them  with  the  penal  consequences  of  their  own 
tolly  :  thus  uniformly  placing  the  bar  to  their  salvation,  just  where 
Christ  places  it,  in  his  parable  of  the  supper,  in  the  perverseness  of 
those,  who  having  been  hidden  to  the  feast,  would  not  come.  From 
these  premises,  then,  it  follows,  that  since  the  Scriptures  always 
attribute  the  ruin  of  men's  souls  t0  their  own  will,  and  not  to  the 
will  of  God  ;  we  ought  to  seek  for  no  other  cause  of  their  condem- 
nation. We  can  know  nothing  on  this  subject  but  what  God  has 
revealed.  He  has  declared  that  it  is  not  his  will  that  men  should 
perish  :  on  the  contrary,  "  He  willeth  all  men  to  be  saved  ;"  and 
therefore,  commands  us  to  pray  for  "  all  men  ;"  ht  has  declared, 
that  the  reason  they  are  not  saved,  is  not  that  Christ  did  not  die  for 
them,  but  that  they  will  not  come  to  him  for  the  "  life"  which  he 
died  to  procure  for  "  the  world ;"  and  it  must  therefore  be  con- 
cluded, that  the  sole  bar  to  the  salvation  of  all  who  are  lost  is  in 
themselves,  and  not  in  any  such  limitation  of  Christ's  redemption, 
as  supposes  that  they  were  not  comprehended  in  its  efficacy  and 
intention. 

It  will  now  be  necessary  for  us  to  consider  what  those  who  have 
adopted  a  different  opinion  have  to  urge  against  these  plain  and 
literal  declarations  of  Scripture.  It  is  their  burthen,  that  they  are 
compelled  to  explain  these  passages  in  a  more  limited  and  qualified 
sense,  than  the  letter  of  them  and  its  obvious  meaning  teaches  ;  and 
that  they  must  do  this  by  inference  merely  ;  for  it  is  not  even  pre- 
tended that  there  is  any  text  whatever  to  be  adduced,  which  declares 
as  literallv,  that  Christ  did  not  die  for  the  salvation  of  nil,  as  thos< 


b'  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

which  declare  that  he  did  so  die.  We  have  no  passages,  therefore, 
to  examine,  which,  in  their  clear  literal  meaning,  stand  opposed  to 
those  which  we  have  quoted,  so  as  to  present  apparent  contradic- 
tions which  require  to  be  reconciled  by  concession  on  one  side  or 
the  other.  This  is  at  least,  prima  facie,  strongly  in  favour  of  those 
who  hold  that,  in  the  same  sense,  and  with  the  same  design,  "  Jesus 
Cririst  tasted  death  for  every  man." 

To  our  first  class  of  texts  it  is  objected,  that  the  terms  "  all  men" 
and  "  the  world"  are  sometimes  used  in  Scripture  in  a  limited  sense. 
This  may  be  granted,  without  injury  to  the  argument  drawn  from 
the  texts  in  question.  But  though  in  Scripture,  as  in  common  lan- 
guage, all,  and  every,  and  such  universals,  are  occasionally  used 
with  limitation  when  the  connexion  prevents  any  misunderstand- 
ing ;  yet  they  are,  nevertheless,  strictly  universal  terms,  and  are 
most  frequently  used  as  such.  The  true  question  is,  whether,  in 
the  places  above  cited,  they  can  be  understood  except  in  the  largest 
sense  ;  whether  "  all  men,"  and  "  the  world,"  can  be  interpreted 
of  the  elect  only,  that  is  of  some  men  of  all  countries. 
We  may  very  confidently  deny  this, 

1.  Because  the  universal  sense  of  the  terms,  "  all,"  and  "  all  men," 
and  "  every  man,"  is  confirmed,  either  by  the  context  of  the  pas- 
sages in  which  they  occur,  or  by  other  Scriptures.     When  Isaiah 
says,  "  All  we  like  sheep  have  g"olie  astray ;  and  the  Lord  hath  laid 
on  him  the  iniquity  of  us  oH (*  he  affirms  that  the  iniquity  of  all 
those  who  have  gone  astray,  was  laid  on  Christ.     When  St.  Paid 
says,  "  We  thus  judge,  that  if  one  died  for  all,  then  were  all  dead ;" 
he  argues  the  universality  of  spiritual  death,  from  the  universality 
of  the  means  adopted  for  raising  men  to  spiritual  life  :  a  plain  proof 
that  it  was  received  as  an  undisputed  principle  in  the  primitive 
church,  that  Christ's  dying  for  all  men  was  to  be  taken  in  its  utmost 
latitude,  or  it  could  not  have  been  made  the  basis  of  the  argument. 
When  the  same  apostle  calls  Christ  the  "  Saviour  of  all  men,  and 
especially  of  those  that  believe,"  he  manifestly  includes  both  be- 
lievers and  unbelievers,  that  is,  all  mankind,  in  the  term  "  all  men  ;" 
and  declares,  that  Christ  is  their  Saviour,  though  the  full  benefits  of 
his  salvation  are  received  through  faith  only  by  them  that  believe. 
When  again  he  declares  that,  "  as  by  the  offence  of  one  judgment 
came  upon  all  men  to  condemnation ;  even  so  by  the  righteousness 
of  one,  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men,  (tig,)  in  order  to  justifica- 
tion of  life  ;"  the  force  of  the  comparison  is  lost  if  the  term  "  all 
men,"  is  not  taken  in  its  full  extent ;  for  the  apostle  is  thus  made 
to  say,  as  by  the  offence  of  one,  judgment  came  upon  all  men  ; 
JBv£n  so  by  the  righteousness  of  one,  the  free  gift  came  upon  a  few 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  9 

men.  Nor  can  it  be  objected,  tbat  the  apostle  uses  the  terms, 
"  many,"  and  "  all  men,"  indiscriminately  in  this  chapter ;  for  there 
is  in  this  no  contradiction,  and  the  objection  is  in  our  favour.  All 
men  are  many,  though  many  are  not  in  every  case  all.  But  the 
term,  "  many,"  is  taken  by  him  in  the  sense  of  all,  as  appears  from 
the  following  parallels  :  "  death  passed  upon  all  men ;"  "  many  be 
dead  ;"  "  the  gift  by  grace  hath  abounded  unto  many ;"  "  the  free 
gift  came  upon  all  men."  "  By  one  man's  disobedience  many  were 
made  (constituted)  sinners,"  made  liable  to  death  ;  "  so  by  the 
obedience  of  one  shall  many  be  made  (constituted)  righteous."  On 
fhe  last  passage  we  may  observe  that,  "  many,"  or  "  the  many,'" 
must  mean  all  men  in  the  first  clause  ;  nor  is  it  to  be  restricted  in 
tlie  second,  as  though,  by  being  "  made  righteous,"  actual  personal 
justification  were  to  be  understood  ;  for  the  apostle  is  not  speaking 
of  believers  individually,  but  of  mankind  collectively,  and  the  oppo- 
site conditions  in  which  the  race  itself  is  placed  by  the  offence  of 
Adam  and  the  obedience  of  Christ  in  all  its  generations. 

It  is  equally  impracticable  to  restrict  the  phrases,  "  the  world," 
"  the  whole  world ;"  and  to  paraphrase  them  the  "  world  of  the 
elect :"  and  yet  there  is  no  other  alternative  ;  for  either  "  the  whole 
world"  means  those  elected  out  of  it ;  or  else  Christ  died  in  an 
equal  sense  for  every  man.  "  God  so  loved  the  icorld,  that  he  gave 
his  only-begotten  Son,"  &c.  Here,  if  the  world  mean  not  the  elect 
only,  but  every  man,  then  every  man  was  "  so  loved"  by  God,  that 
he  gave  his  own  Son  for  his  redemption.  To  say  that  the  world, 
in  a  few  places,  means  the  Roman  empire,  and  in  others  Judea,  is 
nothing  to  the  purpose,  unless  it  were  meant  to  affirm,  that  the  elect 
were  the  people  of  Juik  a,  or  those  of  the  Roman  empire  only.  It 
proves,  it  is  true,  a  hyperbolical  use  of  the  term  in  both  instances  ; 
but  this  cannot  be  urged  in  the  case  before  us  :  for, 

1 .  The  elect  are  never  called  "  the  world"  in  Scripture  ;  but  are 
distinguished  from  it.  "  I  have  chosen  you  out  of  the  Avorld  ;  there- 
fore the  world  hateth  you." 

2.  The  common  division  of  mankind,  in  the  New  Testament,  is 
only  into  two  parts  ;  the  disciples  of  Christ,  and  "  the  world."  "  If 
ye  were  of  the  world,  the  world  would  love  its  own."  "  Ye  are  not 
of  the  world,  even  as  I  am  not  of  the  world."  "  We  know  that  we 
are  of  God,  and  the  whole  world  lieth  in  wickedness." 

3.  When  the  redemption  of  Christ  is  spoken  of,  it  often  includes 
both  those  who  had  been  chosen  out  of  the  world,  and  those  who 
remained  still  of  the  world.  "And  you  halh  he  reconciled,"  say 
the  apostles  to  those  that  had  already  believed ;  and  as  to  the  rest, 
"  God  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world  unto  lumself,  not  impute 

Vol.  II T.  2 


10  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

ing  their  trespasses  unto  them ;  and  hath  committed  to  us  the  word 
of  reconciliation,"  plainly  that  they  might  beseech  this  "  world"  to 
be  reconciled  to  God :  so  that  both  believers  and  unbelievers  were 
interested  in  the  reconciling  ministry,  and  the  work  of  Christ.  "  And 
he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  only ;  but  also  for 
the  sins  of  the  whole  ivorld :"  words  cannot  make  the  case  plainer 
than  these,  since  this  same  writer,  in  the  same  epistle,  makes  it  evi- 
dent how  he  uses  the  term  "  world,"  when  he  affirms  that  "  the  world 
lietli  in  wickedness,"  in  contradistinction  to  those  who  knew  that 
they  were  "  of  God." 

4.  In  the  general  commission  before  quoted,  the  expression 
"  world"  is  connected  with  universal  terms  which  cany  it  forth  into 
its  utmost  latitude  of  meaning.  "  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and 
preach  the  Gospel  (the  good  news)  to  every  creature ;"  and  this  too 
in  order  to  his  believing  it,  that  he  may  be  saved ;  "  he  that  be- 
lieveth  shall  be  saved ;  and  he  that  believeth  not  (this  good  news 
preached  to  him  that  he  might  be  saved)  shall  be  damned." 

5.  All  this  is  confirmed  from  the  gross  absurdity  of  this  restricted 
interpretation  when  applied  to  several  of  the  foregoing  passages. 
"  For  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,, 
that  ichosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  perish."  Now,  if  the 
world  here  means  the  elect  world,  or  the  elect  not  yet  called  out  of 
it,  then  it  is  affirmed,  that  "  ichosoever,'"  of  this  elect  body,  believeth 
shall  not  perish ;  which  plainly  implies,  that  some  of  the  elect  might, 
not  believe,  and  therefore  perish,  contrary  to  their  doctrine.  This 
absurd  consequence  is  still  clearer  from  the  verses  which  immediately 
follow.  John  iii,  17,  18,  "  For  God  sent  not  his  Son  into  the  world 
to  condemn  the  world  ;  but  that  the  world  through  him  might  be 
saved.  He  that  believeth  on  him  is  not  condemned  :  but  he  that 
believeth  not  is  condemned  already."  Now  here  we  must  take  the 
term  "  world,"  either  extensively  for  all  mankind,  or  limitedly  for 
the  elect.  If  the  former,  then  all  men  "through  him  may  be 
saved,"  but  only  through  faith :  he,  therefore,  of  this  world  that 
believeth  may  be  saved  ;  but  he  of  this  world  that  believeth  not  is 
condemned  already."  The  sense  is  here  plain  and  consistent ;  but 
if,  on  the  other  hand,  we  take  "  the  world"  to  mean  the  elect  only, 
then  he  of  this  elect  world  that  believeth  may  be  saved,  and  he  of 
the  elect  world  that  "  believeth  not  is  condemned ;"  so  that  the 
restricted  interpretation  necessarily  supposes  that  elect  persons  may 
remain  in  unbelief,  and  be  lost.  The  same  absurdity  will  follow 
from  a  like  interpretation  of  the  general  commission.  Either  "  all 
the  world"  and  "  every  creature"  mean  every  man,  or  the  elect 
only.     If  the  former,  it  follows,  that  he  of  this  "  world,"  anv  indi- 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  11 

vidual  among'  those  included  in  the  phrase,  "  every  creature,"  who 
believes,  "  shall  be  saved,"  or,  not  believing,  "  shall  be  damned  :** 
if  the  latter,  then  he  of  the  elect,  any  individual  of  the  elect,  who 
believes,  "  shall  be  saved,"  and  any  individual  of  the  elect  who 
believes  not,  "shall  be  damned."  Similar  absurdities  might  be 
brought  out  from  other  passages  ;  but  if  these  are  candidly  weighed, 
it  will  abundantly  appear,  that  texts  so  plain  and  explicit  cannot  be 
turned  into  such  consequences  by  any  true  method  of  interpreta- 
tion, and  that  they  must,  therefore,  be  taken  in  their  obvious  sense, 
which  unequivocally  expresses  the  universality  of  the  atonement. 

It  has  been  urged,  indeed,  that  our  Lord  himself  says,  John  xvii,  9, 
"  I  pray  for  them  :  1  pray  not  for  the  world,  but  for  them  which 
thou  hast  given  me."  But  will  they  here  interpret  "  the  world"  to 
be  the  world  of  the  elect  1  if  so,  they  cut  even  them  off  from  the 
prayers  of  Christ.  But  if  by  "  the  world"  they  would  have  us  un- 
derstand the  world  of  the  non-elect,  then  they  will  find  that  all  the 
prayers  which  our  Lord  puts  up  for  those  whom  "  the  Father  hath 
given  him,"  had  this  end,  "  that  they,"  the  non-elect  "  '  world,'  may 
believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me,"  verse  21  :  let  them  choose  either 
side  of  the  alternative.  The  meaning  of  this  passage  is,  however, 
made  obvious  by  the  context.  Christ,  in  the  former  part  of  his 
intercession,  as  recorded  in  this  chapter,  prays  exclusively,  not  for 
his  church  in  all  ages,  but  for  his  disciples  then  present  with  him  ; 
as  appears  plain  from  verse  12,  "While  I  was  ivith  them  in  the 
world,  I  kept  them  in  thy  name  :"  but  he  was  only  with  his  first 
disciples,  and  for  them  he  exclusively  prays  in  the  first  instance  ; 
then,  in  verse  20,  he  prays  for  all  who,  in  future,  should  believe  on 
him  through  their  words  ;  and  he  does  this  in  order  that  "  the  world 
might  believe."  Thus  "  the  world,"  in  its  largest  sense,  is  not  cut 
off,  but  expressly  included  in  the  benefits  of  this  prayer. 

John  x,  15,  "I  lay  down  my  life  for  the  sheep,"  is  also  adduced, 
to  prove  that  Christ  died  for  none  but  his  sheep.  But  the  conse- 
quence will  not  hold  ;  for  there  is  no  inconsistency  between  his 
having  died  for  them  that  believe,  and  also  for  them  that  believe  not. 
Christ  is  said  to  be  "  the  Saviour  of  all  men,  and  especially  of  them 
that  believe  ;"  two  propositions  which  the  apostle  held  to  be  per- 
fectly consistent.  The  very  context  shows  that  Christ  laid  down 
his  life  for  others  besides  those  whom,  in  that  passage,  he  calls  "  the 
sheep."  The  sheep  here  intended,  as  the  discourse  will  show,  were 
those  of  the  Jewish  "fold  ;"  for  he  immediately  adds,  "other  sheep 
I  have,  which  are  not  of  this  fold,"  clearly  meaning  the  Gentiles  : 
"  them  must  I  bring."  He,  therefore,  laid  down  his  life  for  them 
also ;  for  the  sheep  in  the  fold,  who  "knew  his  voice  and  followed 


12  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

him,"  and  lor  them  out  of  the  fold,  who  still  needed  "bringing  in;" 
even  for  "  the  lost,  whom  he  came  to  seek  and  save,"  which  is  the 
character  of  all  mankind  :  "  all  we  like  sheep  have  gone  astray  ;" 
and  "  the  Lord  hath  laid  on  him  the  iniquity  of  us  all." 

A  restrictive  interpretation  of  the  first  two  classes  of  texts  we 
have  quoted  above,  may  then  be  affirmed  directly  and  expressly  to 
contradict  the  plainest  declarations  of  God's  own  word.  For,  it  is 
not  true,  upon  this  interpretation,  that  God  loved  "  the  world,"  if 
the  majority  he  loved  not ;  nor  is  it  true,  that  Christ  was  not  "  sent 
to  condemn  the  world,"  if  he  was  sent  even  to  enhance  its  con- 
demnation ;  nor  that  the  Gospel,  as  the  Gospel,  can  be  preached 
"  to  every  creature,"  if  to  the  majority  it  cannot  be  preached  as 
"  good  tidings  of  great  joy  to  all  people  ;"  for  it  is  sad  and  doleful 
tidings,  if  the  greater  part  of  the  human  race  are  shut  out  from  the 
mercies  of  their  Creator.  If,  then,  in  this  interpretation  there  is  so 
palpable  a  contradiction  of  the  words  of  inspiration  itself,  the  sys- 
tem which  is  built  upon  it  cannot  be  sustained. 

As  to  the  texts  which  we  have  urged,  as  necessarily  implying  the 
unrestricted  extent  of  the  death  of  Christ,  the  usual  answers  to 
those  which  speak  of  Christ  having  died  for  them  that  perish,  may 
be  briefly  examined.  "  Destroy  not  him  with  thy  meat,  for  whom 
Christ  died,"  Rom.  xiv,  15.  Him,  says  Poole, (4)  for  whom,  "in 
the  judgment  of  charity,"  we  are  to  presume  Christ  died.  To  say 
nothing  of  the  danger  of  such  unlicensed  paraphrases,  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  Scripture,  it  is  obvious  that  this  exposition,  entirely 
annuls  the  motive  by  which  the  apostle  enforces  his  exhortation. 
Why  are  we  not  to  be  an  occasion  of  sin  to  our  brother  1  The 
answer  is,  lest  we  "  destroy  him  ;"  and,  in  the  parallel  place,  1  Cor. 
viii,  11,  lest  "  he  perish."  But  what  is  the  aggravation  of  the  offence  1 
truly  that  "  Christ  died  for  him ;"  and  so  we  have  no  tenderness 
for  a  soul  on  whom  Christ  had  so  much  compassion  as  to  die  for 
his  salvation.  Let  the  text  then  be  tried,  as  paraphrased  by  Poole 
and  other  Calvinists :  "  Destroy  not  him,  for  whom,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  charity,  it  may  be  concluded,  Christ  died ;"  and  it  turns 
the  motive  the  other  way.  For  if  I  admit  that  none  can  be  destroyed 
for  whom  Christ  died,  then,  in  proportion  to  the  charity  of  my  judg- 
ment, that  any  individual  is  of  this  number,  I  may  be  the  less  cau- 
tious of  ensnaring  his  conscience  in  indifferent  matters ;  since  at 
least,  this  is  certain,  that  he  cannot  perish,  and  I  cannot  be  guilty 
of  the  aggravated  offence  of  destroying  him  who  was  an  object  of 
the  compassion  of  Christ.  Who  can  suppose  that  the  apostle  would 
thus  counteract  bis  own  design  1  or  that  he  should  seriously  admon- 

M")  Annotations. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  1 ! j 

ish  his  readers  not  to  do  that  which  was  impossible  it',  in  fact,  he 
taught  them  that  Christ  died  only  for  the  elect ;  and  that  they  for 
whom  he  died,  could  never  perish  1  Another  commentator,  of  the 
same  school,  explains  this  as  a  caution  against  doing  that  which  had 
a  "  tendency  to  the  ruin  of  one  for  whom  Christ  died  ;  not  that  it  im- 
plies, that  the  weak  brother  would  actually  perish."  (5)  But  in  this 
case,  also,  as  it  is  assumed,  that  it  was  a  doctrine  taught  by  St.  Paul 
and  received  by  the  churches  to  whom  he  wrote,  that  the  elect 
could  not  perish,  the  motive  is  taken  away  upon  which  the  admo- 
nition is  grounded.  For  if  the  persons,  to  whom  the  apostle  wrote, 
knew  that  the  weak  brother,  for  whom  Christ  died,  could  not  perish, 
then  nothing  which  they  could  do  had  any  "  tendency"  to  destroy 
him.  It  might  injure  him,  disturb  his  mind,  lead  him  into  sin, 
destroy  his  comforts  ;  all,  or  any  of  which,  would  have  been  appro- 
priate motives  on  which  to  have  urged  the  caution  :  but  nothing  can 
have  even  a  tendency  to  destroy  him  whose  salvation  is  fixed  by  an 
unalterable  decree.  Mr.  Scott  is,  however,  evidently,  not  satisfied 
with  his  own  interpretation ;  and  gives  a  painful  example  of  the 
influence  of  a  preconceived  system  in  commenting  upon  Scripture, 
by  charging  the  apostle  himself  with  careless  writing.  "  We  may, 
however,  observe,  that  the  apostles  did  not  write  in  that  exact  sys- 
tematical style,  which  some  affect,  otherwise  they  would  scrupulously 
have  avoided  such  expressions."  This  is  rather  in  the  manner  of 
Priestley  and  Belsham,  than  that  of  an  orthodox  commentator  ;  but 
it  does  homage  to  the  force  of  truth  by  turning  away  from  it,  and 
by  tacitly  acknowledging  that  the  Scriptures  cannot  be  Calvinistic- 
ally  interpreted.  The  same  commentators,  following,  as  they  do, 
in  the  train  of  the  Calvinistic  divines  in  general,  may  furnish,  also, 
the  answer  to  the  argument,  from  2  Pet.  ii,  1,  "  Denying  the  Lord 
that  bought  them,  and  bringing  upon  themselves  swift  destruction." 
Poole  gives  us  three  interpretations :  the  first  is,  "  The  Lord  that 
bought  Israel  out  of  Egypt ;"  as  though  St.  Peter  could  be  speak- 
ing of  the  Mosaic,  and  not  of  the  Christian  Redemption ;  and  as 
though  the  Judaizing  teachers,  supposing  the  apostle  to  speak  of 
them,  denied  the  God  of  the  Jews,  when  it  was  their  object  to  set 
up  his  religion  against  that  of  Christ.  The  second  is,  that  "  they 
were  bought,"  or  redeemed,  by  Christ,  from  temporal  death,  their 
lives  having  been  spared  :  but  we  have  no  such  doctrine  in  Scrip- 
ture, as  that  the  long  suffering  of  wicked  men,  procured  by  Christ's 
Redemption,  is  unconnected  in  its  intent  with  their  eternal  salvation. 
The  barren  fig  tree  was  spared  at  the  intercession  of  Christ,  that 
means  might  be  taken  with  it,  to  make  it  fruitful ;  and  in  this  same 
(.V)  Rev.  T.  Scott's  Note*?. 


U  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

epistle  of  St.  Peter,  he  teaches  us  to  "  account  the  long  suffering 
of  the  Lord  salvation;"  meaning,  doubtless,  in  its  tendency  and 
intention.  To  this  we  may  add,  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  con- 
text to  warrant  this  notion  of  mere  temporal  redemption.  The 
third  interpretation  is,  "  that  they  denied  the  Lord,  whom  they  pro- 
fessed to  have  bought  them."  This  also  is  gratuitous,  and  gives  a 
very  different  sense  from  that  which  the  words  of  the  apostle  con- 
vey. But  it  is  argued,  that  the  offence  would  be  the  same  in 
denying  Christ,  whether  he  really  died  for  them,  or  that  they  had 
professed  to  believe  he  died  for  them.  Certainly  not.  Their  crime, 
as  it  is  put  by  the  apostle,  is  not  the  denying  of  their  former  profes- 
sion, or  denying  Christ,  whom  they  formerly  professed  to  have 
bought  them  ;  but  denying  Christ,  who  had  actually  bought  them, 
and  whom,  for  that  reason,  they  ought  never  to  have  denied,  but 
confessed  at  the  hazard  of  their  lives.  Farther,  if  they  merely 
denied  that  which  they  formerly  professed,  namely,  that  Christ  had 
bought  them,  and,  in  point  of  fact,  he  never  did  buy  them,  they 
were  in  error  when  they  professed  to  believe  that  he  bought  them, 
and  spoke  the  truth  only  when  they  denied  it ;  and  if  it  be  said, 
that  they  knew  not  but  he  had  bought  them,  when  they  denied  him, 
this  might  be  a  reason  for  their  not  being  rewarded  for  renouncing 
an  error,  as  being  done  unwittingly  ;  but  can  be  no  reason  for  their 
being  punished,  though  unwittingly  they  went  back  to  the  truth  of 
the  case.  There  can  be  no  great  guilt  in  our  denying  Christ,  if 
Christ  never  died  for  us. 

Mr.  Scott  partly  adopts,  and  partly  rejects  Poole's  solution  of 
this  scriptural  difficulty.  But  as  he  charged  St.  Paul  with  want  of 
exactness  in  writing  to  the  Romans,  so  also  St.  Peter,  in  the  passage 
before  us,  comes  in  for  his  share  of  the  same  censure.  "  It  was 
not  the  manner  of  the  sacred  writers,  to  express  themselves  with 
that  systematic  exactness,  which  many  now  affect."  The  question 
is  not,  however,  one  of  systematic  exactness ;  but  of  common 
intelligible  writing.  Mr.  Scott's  observation  on  this  passage,  is,  that 
Christ's  ransom  was  of  infinite  sufficiency  ;  and  the  proposal  of  it, 
in  Scripture,  general ;  so  that  men  are  addressed  according  to  their 
profession  :  but  that  Christ  only  intended  to  redeem  those,  whom  he 
foresaw  would  eventually  be  saved." (6)  On  this  we  may  remark, 
1.  That  the  sufficiency  of  Christ's  Redemption,  is  not  in  question ; 
but  the  Redemption  itself  of  these  deniers  of  Christ :  he  is  called 
"  the  Lord  that  bought  them."  In  thai  sufficiency,  too,  Mr.  Scott 
affirms,  in  fact,  that  they  had  no  interest ;  for  Christ  did  not  "  intend 
to  redeem  them ;"  on  this  showing,  therefore,  the  Lord  did  not 
f6>  Notes  nn  9  Peter. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  i O 

"  buy  them,"  wliich  contradicts  the  apostle.  2.  That  the  "  proposal 
of  the  benefits  of  Christ's  Redemption  is  general ;"  and  that  men 
are  addressed,  accordingly,  as  those  who  are  interested  in  it :  we 
grant,  and  feel  how  well  this  accords  with  the  doctrine  of  general 
Redemption  ;  but  the  difficulty  lies  with  those  who  hold  the  limita- 
tion of  Christ's  Redemption  to  the  elect  only,  to  explain,  not  merely 
how  it  is  that  men  are  addressed  generally ;  but  how  the  sins  ot 
those  who  perish,  can  be  aggravated  by  the  circumstance  of  Christ's 
having  bought  them,  if  he  did  not  buy  them  ;  and  how  they  can  be 
punished  for  rejecting  him,  if  they  could  never  receive  him,  so  as 
to  be  saved  by  him.  This  aggravation  of  their  offence,  by  the 
circumstance  of  Christ  having  bought  them,  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
text,  of  the  force  of  which  the  above  interpretations  are  manifest, 
evasions. 

We  come  now  to  the  case  of  the  apostates,  mentioned  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  vi,  4-8,  and  x,  26-31.  With  respect  to 
these  passages,  it  is  agreed  that  they  speak  of  the  ultimate  and 
eternal  condemnation  and  rejection  of  the  persons  mentioned  in 
them.  The  question  then  is,  whether  Christ  died  for  them,  as  he 
died  for  such  as  persevere  1  which  is  to  be  determined  by  another 
question,  whether  they  were  ever  true  believers,  and  had  received 
saving  grace  1  If  this  be  allowed,  the  proposition  is  established,  that. 
Christ  died  for  them  that  perish ;  but  in  order  to  arrest  this  con- 
clusion, all  Calvinistic  divines  agree  in  denying  that  the  persons 
referred  to  by  the  apostle,  and  against  whom  his  terrible  denuncia- 
tions are  directed,  were  ever  true  believers,  or  capable  of  becoming- 
such  ;  and  here  again  we  have  another  pregnant  instance  of  the 
violence  done  to  the  obvious  meaning  of  the  word  of  God,  through 
the  influence  of  a  preconceived  system.     For, 

1.  It  will  not  be  denied,  that  the  Hebrews  to  whom  the  epistle 
was  addressed,  were,  in  the  main  at  least,  true  believers  ;  and  that 
the  passages  in  question  were  written  to  preserve  them  from  apos- 
tasy ;  of  which  the  rejection,  and  hopeless  punishment,  described 
by  the  apostle,  is  represented  as  the  consequence.  But  if  St.  Paul 
had  taught  them,  as  he  must  have  done,  if  Calvinism  be  the  doctrine 
of  the  New  Testament,  that  they  never  could  so  fall  away,  and  so 
perish,  this  was  no  warning  at  all  to  them.  To  suppose  he  held 
out  that  as  a  terror,  which  he  knew  to  be  impossible,  and  had  taught 
them  also  to  be  impossible,  is  the  first  absurdity  which  the  Calvin- 
istic interpretation  involves. 

2.  It  will  not  be  denied,  that  he  speaks  of  these  wretched  apos- 
tates, as  deterring  examples  to  the  true  believers  amongst  the 
Hebrews;  but  as  such  apostates  neve]- were  believers,  and  were 


\ii  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

not  even  rendered  capable,  by  the  grace  of  God,  of  becoming  such, 
they  could  not  be  admonitory  examples.  To  assume  that  the 
apostle,  for  the  sake  of  argument  and  admonition,  supposes  believers 
to  be  in  the  same  circumstances  and  case  as  those  who  never  were, 
and  never  could  be  believers,  and  when  he  had  instructed  them 
that  their  cases  could  never  be  similar,  is  the  second  absurdity. 

3.  The  apostates  in  question  are  represented,  by  the  apostle, 
"  as  falling  away"  from  "  repentance,"  and  from  Christ's  "  sacrifice 
for  sins."  The  advocates  of  the  system  of  partial  redemption, 
affirm,  that  they  fell  away  only  from  their  profession  of  repentance 
and  doctrinal  belief  of  Christ's  sacrifice  for  sins,  in  which  they  never 
had,  and  never  could  have,  any  interest.  Yet  the  apostle  places 
the  hopelessness  of  their  state  on  the  impossibility  of  "  renewing 
them  again  to  repentance  ;"  which  proves  that  he  considered  their 
first  repentance  genuine  and  evangelical ;  because  the  absence  of 
such  a  repentance,  as  they  had  at  first,  is  given  as  the  reason  of  the 
hopelessness  of  their  condition.  He  moreover  heightens  the  case, 
by  alleging,  that  there  remained  "  no  more  sacrifice  for  sins  ;"  which 
as  plainly  proves  that,  before  their  apostasy,  there  was  a  sacrifice 
for  their  sins,  and  that  they  had  only  cut  themselves  off  from  its 
benefits  by  "  wilfully"  renouncing  it ;  in  other  words,  that  Christ 
died  for  them,  and  that  they  had  placed  themselves  out  of  the  reach 
of  the  benefit  of  his  death,  by  this  one  act  of  aggravated  apostasy. 
The  contrast  lies  between  a  hopeful  and  a  hopeless  case.  Theirs 
was  once  a  hopeful  case,  because  they  had  "  repented,"  and  be- 
cause there  was  then  a  "  sacrifice  for  sins  ;"  afterwards  it  became 
hopeless,  because  it  was  "  impossible  to  renew  them  again  unto 
repentance,"  and  the  sacrifice  for  sin  no  more  remained  for  them  : 
they  had  not  only  renounced  their  profession  of  it ;  but  had  re- 
nounced the  sacrifice  itself,  by  renouncing  Christianity.  Now,  so 
to  interpret  the  apostle,  as  to  make  him  describe  the  awful  condition 
of  apostates,  as  a  "  falling  away"  into  a  state  of  hopelessness,  when, 
if  Calvinism  be  the  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament,  their  case  was 
never  really  hopeful,  but  was  as  hopeless,  as  to  their  eternal  salva- 
tion, before  as  after  their  apostasy,  is  the  third  absurdity. 

4.  But  it  is  plain  that  theirs  had  been  a  state  of  actual  salvation, 
which  could  only  result  from  their  having  had  an  interest  in  the 
death  of  Christ.  The  proof  of  this  lies  in  what  the  apostle  affirms 
of  the  previous  state  of  those  who  had  finally  apostatized,  or  might 
so  apostatize.  They  were  "  enlightened ;"  this,  the  whole  train  of 
Calvinistic  commentators  tell  us,  means  a  mere  speculative  reception 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel ;  they  had  "  tasted  of  the  heavenly 
jrift,"   and  of  "  the  good  word  of  God ;"  that  is.  say  Poole  and 


SECOKD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  17 

others,  "  they  tasted,  not  digested  ;  they  had  superficial  relishes  of 
joy  and  peace,"  and  are  to  be  compared  "  to  the  stony  ground 
hearers,  who  received  the  word  with  joy."     "  And  were  made 
partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  that  is,  say  some  commentators  of 
this  class,  in  his  operations,  "  trying  how  far  a  natural  man  may  be 
raised,  and  not  have  his  nature  changed:" (7)  others,  "by  the 
communication  of  miraculous  powers."     They  had  "  tasted  of  the 
powers  of  the  world  to  come  ;"  that  is,  they  had  felt  the  powerful 
doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  but  as  all  reprobates  may  feel  them,  some- 
times powerfully  convincing  their  judgment,  at  others  troubling  their 
consciences.    "  All  these  tilings,"  says  Scott,  (8)  "  often  take  place 
in.the  hearts  and  consciences  of  men,  who  yet  continue  unregene- 
rate."     These  interpretations  are  undoubtedly  forced  upon  these 
authors   by  the  system  they  have  adopted ;  but  it  unfortunately 
happens  for  them,  that  the  apostle  uses  no  term  less  strong  in 
describing  the  religious  experience  of  these  apostates  than  he  does 
in  speaking  of  that  of  true  believers.     They  were  "  enlightened"  is 
said  of  these  apostates,  "  the  eyes  of  your  understanding  being 
enlightened,"  is  said  of  the  Ephesians ;  and  "  being  turned  from 
darkness  to  light"  is  the  characteristic  of  all  believers.     The  apos- 
tates "  tasted  the  heavenly  gift ;"  this,  too,  is  affirmed  of  true  be- 
lievers, "  much  more  they  which  receive  abundance  of  grace,  and 
of  the  gift  of  righteousness,  shall  reign  in  life  by  one,  Jesus  Christ," 
Rom.  v,  17.     To  be  made  "partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  is  also 
the  common  distinctive  character  of  all  true  Christians.     "  If  any 
man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his  ;"  "  but  ye  are 
not  in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  Spirit,  if  so  be  that  the  Spirit  of  God 
dwell  in  you."     "  To  taste  the  heavenly  gift"  and  "  the  good  word 
of  God,"  is  also  made  the  mark  of  true  Christianity  :  "  if  so  be  ye 
have  tasted  that  the  Lord  is  gracious."    Finally,  "  the  powers  of  the 
world  to  come  ;"  that  is,  of  the  Gospel  dispensation,  or  the  power 
of  the  Gospel,  stand  in  precisely  the  same  case.   This  Gospel  is  the 
"  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that  believeth."   Since, 
then,  the  apostle  expresses  the  prior  experience  of  these  apostates, 
by  the  same  terms  and  phrases  as  those  by  which  he  designates  the. 
work  of  God  in  the  hearts  of  those  whose  Christianity  is,  by  all, 
acknowledged  to  be  genuine,  where  is  the  authority  on  which  these 
commentators  make  him  describe,  not  a  saving  work  in  the  hearts 
of  these  apostates,  during  the  time  they  held  fast  their  profession, 
but  a  simulated  one  1    They  have  clearly  no  authority  for  this  at 
all ;  and  their  comments  arise  not  out  of  the  argument  of  St.  Paul, 
nor  out  of  his  terms  or  phrases,  or  the  connexion  of  these  passagef 
(7)  Poole  in  loc.  (8)  Notes 

Vol.  HI. 


18  THEOLOGICAL  INSTrTtTTES.  [part 

with  the  rest  of  the  discourse ;  but  out  of  their  own  theological 
system  alone  ;  in  other  words,  out  of  a  mere  human  opinion  which 
supplies  a  meaning  to  the  apostle,  of  which  he  gives  not  the  most 
distant  intimation.  To  make  the  apostle  describe  the  falling  away 
from  a  mere  profession  unaccompanied  with  a  state  of  grace,  by 
terms  which  he  is  constantly  using  to  describe  and  characterize  a 
state  of  grace,  is  the  fourth  absurdity. 

We  mark,  also,  two  other  absurdities.  The  interpretations  above 
given  are  below  the  force  of  the  terms  employed ;  and  they  are  above 
the  character  of  reprobates. 

They  are  beloio  the  force  of  the  terms  employed.  To  "  taste  the 
heavenly  gift,"  is  not  a  mere  intellectual  or  sentimental  approval  -of 
it ;  for  this  heavenly  gift  is  distinguished  both  from  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  from  the  word  of  God,  mentioned  afterwards  ;  which  leaves  us 
no  choice  but  to  interpret  it  of  Christ :  and  then  to  taste  of  Christ, 
is  to  receive  his  grace  and  mercy  ;  "  if  so  be  ye  have  tasted  that  the 
Lord  is  gracious."  Thus  the  Greek  fathers,  and  many  later  divines, 
understand  it  of  the  remission  of  sins  ;  which  interpretation  is  greatly 
confirmed  by  Rom.  v,  where  " the  gift"  " the  free  gift,"  and  " the 
gift  by  grace,"  are  used  both  for  the  means  of  our  justification,  and 
for  justification  itself.  To  "  taste  the  heavenly  gift,"  then,  is,  in  this 
sense,  so  to  taste  that  the  Lord  is  gracious  as  to  receive  the  remission 
of  sins.  To  be  made  "  partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  follows  this 
in  the  usual  order  of  describing  the  work  of  God  in  the  heart.  It 
is  the  fruit  of  faith,  the  Spirit  of  adoption  and  sanctification — the 
Spirit  in  his  comforting  and  renewing  influences  following  our  justi- 
fication. To  restrain  this  participation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the 
endowment  of  miraculous  powers,  requires  it  to  be  previously 
established,  either,  1.  That  all  professing  Christians,  in  that  age, 
were  thus  endowed  with  miraculous  powers,  of  which  there  is  no 
proof;  or,  2.  That  only  those  who  were  thus  endowed  with  mira- 
culous gifts  were  capable  of  this  aggravated  apostasy ;  and  then 
the  apostle's  warning  would  not  be  a  general  one,  even  to  the 
Christians  of  the  apostolic  age,  nor  even  to  all  the  believing  Hebrews, 
which  it  manifestly  is.  On  the  other  hand,  since  all  true  believers 
in  the  sense  of  the  apostle,  received  the  Holy  Ghost  in  his  comforting 
and  renovating  influences,  the  meaning  of  the  phrase  becomes 
obvious,  and  it  lays  down  the  proper  ground  for  a  general  admo- 
nition. Again  ;  "to  taste  the  good  word  of  God,"  is  still  an  advance 
in  the  process  of  a  genuine  experience.  It  is  tasting  the  good  word, 
that  is,  the  goodness  of  the  word  in  a  course  of  experience  and 
practice  ;  having  personal  proof  of  its  goodness  and  adaptation  to 
man's  state  in  the  world  :  for  to  argue  from  the  term  " taste"  a? 


SECOND.  J  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  19 

though  something-  superficial  and  transitory  only  were  meant,  is  as 
absurd  as  to  argue  from  the  threat  of  Christ  that  those  who  refused 
the  invitation  of  his  servants  should  not  "  taste"  of  his  supper,  that 
he  only  excluded  them  from  a  superficial  and  transient  gustation  of 
his  salvation  here  and  hereafter ;  or  that,  when  the  psalmist  calls 
upon  us  to  "  taste  and  see  that  the  Lord  is  good,"  he  excludes  a 
full,  and  rich,  and  permanent  experience  of  the  Divine  goodness. 
Finally,  if  by  the  "  powers  of  the  world  to  come,"  it  could  be  proved 
that  the  apostle  meant  the  miraculous  evidences  of  the  truth  of  the 
Gospel,  it  would  not  follow,  that  he  supposes  the  persons  spoken 
of  to  be  endowed  with  miraculous  powers  ;  but  that  to  taste  these 
powers,  was  rather  to  experience  the  abundant  blessings  of  a  religion 
thus  confirmed  and  demonstrated  by  signs  and  wonders  and  divers 
miracles,  according  to  what  he  urges  in  chap,  ii,  4,  of  the  same 
epistle.  The  phrase,  however,  is  probably  a  still  farther  advance 
upon  the  former,  and  signifies  a  personal  experience  of  the  mighty 
energy  and  saving  power  of  the  Gospel.  Thus  the  interpretation 
of  the  Calvinists  has  the  absurdity  of  making  the  apostle  speak  little 
things  in  great  words,  and  of  using  unmeaning  tautologies.  To 
"  partake  of  the  Holy  Ghost"  is,  according  to  them,  to  have  the  gift 
of  miracles,  and  to  taste  "  the  powers  of  the  world  to  come"  is  to 
have  the  gift  of  miracles.  To  taste  the  "  heavenly  gift,"  is  to  have 
a  superficial  relish  of  Gospel  doctrine,  and  "  to  taste  the  good  word 
of  God,"  is  also  to  have  a  superficial  relish  of  Gospel  doctrine  :  but 
how,  then,  are  we  to  take  the  term  "taste,"  when  the  apostle  speaks 
of  tasting  "  the  powers  of  the  world  to  come  1"  According  to  these 
comments,  this  can  only  mean  that  they  had  a  superficial  taste  of 
the  power  of  working  miracles  ! 

But  as  these  interpretations  are  below  the  force  of  the  terms,  so 
they  are  above  the  capacity  of  the  reprobate.  "  They  had,  moreover," 
says  Scott,  "  tasted  of  the  good  word  of  God,  and  their  connexions, 
impressions,  and  transient  affections  made  them  sensible  that  it  was 
a  good  word,  and  that  it  was  for  their  good  to  attend  to  it ;  and 
their  purposes  of  doing  so  had  produced  such  hopes  and  joys,  a« 
have  been  described  in  the  case  of  the  stony  ground  hearers,  Matt, 
xiii,  21,  22."  That  Mr.  Scott  had  no  right  apprehension  of  the 
class  of  persons  intended  by  those  who  received  the  good  seed  upon 
stony  ground,  might  easily  be  proved  ;  but  this  is  beside  our  present 
purpose.  We  find  in  the  words  quoted  above,  (and  we  refer  to 
Mr.  Scott  rather  than  to  the  older  divines  of  the  same  school, 
because  it  is  often  said  that  Calvinism  is  now  modified  and  improved,) 
"  convictions,"  "  impressions  of  the  goodness  of  the  word,"  and 
purposes  of  attending  to  it,  ascribed  to  the  non-elect :  persons  tb 


ZO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PAR'l 

whose  salvation  this  bar  is  placed,  that,  according  to  this  comment- 
ator, and  all  others  who  adopt  the  same  system,  Christ  never 
"  intentionally"  died  for  them.  We  ask,  then,  are  these  "convictions, 
impressions,"  and  "  purposes,"  from  the  grace  of  God  working  in 
man,  or  from  the  natural  man  wholly  unassisted  by  the  grace  of 
God  ]  If  the  latter,  then  what  becomes  of  the  doctrine  of  the  entire 
corruption  of  human  nature,  which  they  profess  to  hold,  and  that 
so  strenuously  1  "  In  me,  that  is  in  my  flesh,  dwelleth  no  good  thing." 
By  the  flesh,  the  apostle  means,  doubtless,  his  natural  and  unassisted 
state.  Yet  how  many  "  good  things"  are  ascribed,  by  Mr.  Scott, 
to  the  very  reprobate  1  "  Conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  Gospel"  was 
doubtless  "  good,"  and  showed,  in  that  day  especially,  when  the 
prejudices  of  education  had  not  yet  come  in  to  the  aid  of  truth,  an 
honest  spirit  of  inquiry,  and  a  docile  mind.  "  Impressions"  are  still 
better,  as  they  argue  affection  to  truth  which  the  natural  man,  as 
such,  hates  ;  and  these  are  improved  into  an  acknowledgment  "  of 
the  goodness  of  the  word,"  though  it  is  a  reproving  word,  and  a 
doctrine  of  holiness,  and  consequently  of  restraint.  To  this  the 
merely  "carnal  mind,"  which  St.  Paul  declares  to  be  "enmity 
against  God,"  is  here  allowed  not  only  to  assent,  but  also  to  perceive 
with  some  taste  and  approving  relish.  "  Purposes  of  attending  to 
this  good  word,"  are  also  admitted,  which  is  a  still  farther  advance, 
and  must  by  all  be  acknowledged  to  be  "  good,"  as  they  are  the 
very  basis  of  real  religious  attainment.  Yet  if  all  these,  which,  in 
the  judgment  of  every  spiritual  man  would  be  considered  as  placing 
such  persons  in  a  very  hopeful  state,  and  would  give  joy  to  angels, 
unless  they  were  admitted  to  the  secret  of  reprobation,  are  to  be 
ascribed  to  nature  ;  then  the  carnal  mind  is  not  absolutely  and  in  all 
cases  "  enmity  against  God  ;"  in  our  "  flesh  some  good  thing  may 
dwell ;"  and  we  are  not  by  nature  "  dead  hi  trespasses  and  sins." 

Let  us  then  suppose,  since  this  position  cannot  be  maintained  in 
defiance  of  the  Scriptures,  that  these  are  the  effects  of  the  grace  of 
God,  and  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  man  ;  to  what  end  is 
that  grace  exerted  1  Is  it  that  it  may  lead  to  salvation  1  This  is 
denied,  and  consistently  so  ;  for  can  such  convictions,  and  desires, 
and  purposes,  lead  to  true  repentance,  when  Christ  gives  true 
repentance  to  none  but  to  the  elect  1  Nor  can  they  lead  to  pardon, 
because  Christ  has  not  intentionally  "  died  for  the  persons  in  ques- 
tion." Is  the  end,  then,  as  Poole,  or  rather  his  continuator  states 
it,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  may  "  try  how  far  a  natural  man  may  be 
raised"  without  ceasing  to  be  so  1  If  that  is  affirmed,  for  whose  sake 
is  the  experiment  tried  1  Not  surely  for  the  sake  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
whose  omniscience  needs  no  instruction  by  experiment :  not  fpr 


Second.]  theological  institutes.  21 

ours  ;  for  this,  instead  of  being-  edifying,  only  puzzles  and  confounds 
us,  for  who  can  tell  how  far  this  experiment  may  go,  and  how  far 
it  is  making  upon  himself?  This,  too,  is  so  very  unworthy  an 
aspersion  upon  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  it  ought  to  make  sober  men 
very  much  suspect  the  system  which  requires  it.  Is  it  then,  finally, 
as  some  have  affirmed,  to  make  the  persons  more  guilty,  and  to 
heighten  their  condemnation  1  How  few  Calvinists,  in  the  present 
day,  are  bold  enough  to  affirm  this,  although  the  advocates  of  that 
system  have  formerly  done  it ;  and  yet  this  is  the  only  practical  end 
which  their  system  will  allow  to  be  assigned  to  such  an  act  as  that 
which,  by  a  strange  abuse  of  terms,  is  called  the  operation  of 
"  common  grace"  in  the  hearts  of  the  reprobate.  In  no  other 
practical  end  can  it  issue,  but  to  aggravate  their  guilt  and  damna- 
tion, as  the  old  divines  of  this  school  perceived  and  acknowledged. 
Either,  then,  their  interpretation  of  these  passages  affirms  a  change 
in  the  principles  and  feelings  of  the  persons  spoken  of  by  the  apostle 
in  this  epistle,  much  above  the  capacity  and  power  of  reprobates, 
greatly  as  it  falls  below  the  real  import  of  the  terms  used  ;  or  else 
those  who  advocate  the  doctrine  of  reprobation  are  bound  to  the 
revolting  conclusion,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  thus  works  in  them  only 
to  promote  and  deepen  their  destruction. 

To  that  class  of  texts,  which  make  it  the  duty  of  men  to  believe 
the  Gospel,  and  threaten  them  with  punishment  for  not  believing, 
and  which  we  adduced  to  prove,  by  necessary  implication,  that 
Christ  died  for  all  men,  it  has  been  replied ;  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
all  men  to  believe  the  Gospel,  whether  they  are  interested  in  the 
death  of  Christ  or  not ;  and  that  they  are  guilty  and  deserving  of 
punishment  for  not  believing  it.  By  this  argument  it  is  conceived, 
that  all  such  passages  are  made  consistent  with  the  doctrine  of  the 
limited  extent  of  the  death  of  Christ. 

On  both  sides,  then,  it  is  granted,  that  it  is  the  bounden  duty  of 
all  men  who  hear  the  Gospel  to  believe  it,  and  that  the  violation  ol 
this  duty  induces  condemnation  ;  but  if  Christ  died  not  for  all  such 
persons,  we  think  it  is  plain,  that  it  cannot  be  their  duty  to  belie\re 
the  Gospel ;  and  if  this  can  be  established,  then  does  the  scriptural 
principle  of  the  obligation  of  all  men  to  believe,  which  is  acknow- 
ledged on  both  sides,  refute  all  limitation  of  the  extent  p(  Christ's 
atonement. 

To  settle  this  point,  it  is  necessary  to  determine  what  is  meant 
by  believing  the  Gospel.  Some  writers  in  this  controversy  seem  to 
take  it  only  in  the  sense  of  giving  credit  to  the  Gospel  as  a  Divine 
Revelation  ;  and  not  for  accepting  and  trusting  in  it  in  order  to  sal- 
vation.    But  we  have,  in  the  New  Testament,  no  such  division  of 


H  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

the  obligation  of  believing  into  two  distinct  duties,  one  laid  upon  one 
class  of  persons,  and  the  other  upon  another  class.  So  far  from 
this,  the  faith  which  the  Gospel  requires  of  all,  is  trust  in  the  Gos- 
pel ; — "  repentance  towards  God,  and  faith  (trust)  in  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ."  Will  any  say,  that  when  all  men  are  commanded 
"  every  where  to  repent,"  two  kinds  of  repentance  are  intended, 
one  ineffectual,  the  other  effectual ;  one  to  death,  the  other  to  life  ? 
And  if  not,  will  he  contend  that  God  commands  one  kind  of  faith 
to  some,  a  faith  which  cannot  lead  to  salvation ;  another  kind  of 
faith,  which  does  lead  to  salvation,  to  others  ]  that  he  commands  a 
dead  faith  to  the  reprobate,  a  living  faith  to  the  elect  1  For,  accord- 
ing to  the  intention  of  the  command,  such  must  be  the  duty  ;  and 
if  it  is  the  duty  of  the  reprobate  to  believe  with  the  mere  faith  of 
assent,  which,  as  to  them,  is  dead,  then  no  more  was  ever  required 
of  them,  in  the  intention  of  God,  than  this  dead  faith.  But  if  men 
will  affirm  this,  they  must  show  us  such  a  restricted  and  modified 
command  from  God ;  and  they  must  point  out,  in  the  commands 
which  we  have  to  believe  in  Christ,  such  a  distinction  of  the  obliga- 
tion of  believing  into  a  higher  and  lower  duty.  There  is  no  such 
modified  command,  and  there  is  no  such  distinction ;  but,  on  the 
contrary,  the  faith  which  is  required  of  all  is  that,  and  not  less  than 
that,  whereof  cometh  salvation ;  for  with  remission  of  sins  and  sal- 
vation it  is  constantly  connected.  "He  that  believeth  shall  be 
saved."  "  Whosoever  believeth  on  him  shall  not  perish."  "  That 
believing  ye  might  have  life  through  his  name."  "  To  him  give  all 
the  prophets  witness,  that  through  his  name  whosoever  believeth  in 
him  shall  receive  remission  of  sins."  The  faith,  then,  required  of 
all,  is  true  faith  ;  true  faith  following  true  repentance,  the  trust  of 
a  true  penitent  in  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  as  offered  for  his  sins,  that 
he  may  be  forgiven,  and  received  into  the  family  of  God. 

If  this,  then,  be  the  faith  which  is  required  of  all  who  hear  the 
Gospel,  it  is  not,  and  cannot  be  the  duty,  of  those  to  believe  the 
Gospel,  in  the  scriptural  sense  of  believing,  for  whom  Christ  died 
not.  1.  Because  it  is  impossible,  and  God  cannot  command  a 
thing  impossible,  and  then  punish  men  for  not  doing  it ;  for  this 
contradicts  all  notions  of  justice  and  benevolence.  Nor  does  it  alter 
the  case  whether  the  impossibility  arises  from  a  positive  necessitat- 
ing decree,  or  from  withholding  the  aid  necessary  to  enable  them 
to  comply  with  the  command ;  such  persons  as  those  for  whom 
Christ  died  not,  never  had,  and  never  can  have,  the  power  to  exer- 
cise the  saving  faith  which  is  enjoined  upon  them ;  and  being 
impossible  to  them,  it  never  could  be  the  subject  of  express  com- 
mand and  obligation  as  to  them  ;  which  nevertheless  it  is.     2.  B<'~ 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  23 

cause,  according  to  the  Calvinistic  opinion,  it  is  not  in  the  intention 
of  God  that  they  should  believe  and  be  saved  :  what,  therefore,  he 
never  intended,  he  could  not  command ;  and  yet  he  has  plainly 
commanded  it.  3.  Because  what  all  are  bound  to  believe  or  trust 
in,  is  true  :  but  it  is  false,  according  to  this  system,  that  Christ  died 
for  the  reprobate,  and  therefore  they  are  not  bound  to  believe,  or 
trust  in  him,  though  they  are  both  commanded  to  believe,  and 
threatened  with  condemnation  if  they  believe  not. 

Here,  then,  is  the  dilemma  into  which  all  must  fall,  who  deny 
that  the  necessary  inference  from  the  universal  obligation  to  believe 
in  Christ,  is,  as  we  have  stated  it,  that  he  died  for  all.  If  they  deny 
the  universality  of  the  obligation  to  believe,  they  deny  plain  and 
express  Scripture,  which  commands  all  men  to  believe ;  if  they 
affirm  the  obligation  to  believe  to  be  universal,  they  hold  that  men 
are  bound  to  do  that  which  is  impossible  ;  that  the  Lawgiver  com- 
mands them  to  do  what  he  never  intended  they  should  do  ;  and  that 
they  are  bound  to  believe  and  trust  in  what  is  not  true,  namely,  that 
Christ  died  for  them,  and  thus  to  lean  upon  a  broken  reed,  and  to 
trust  then  salvation  to  a  delusion. 

This  is  a  difficulty  which  the  theologians  of  this  school  have  felt. 
The  synod  of  Dort  says, (9)  "  It  is  the  promise  of  the  Gospel,  that 
whosoever  believes  in  Christ  crucified  should  not  perish,  but  have 
everlasting  life  ;  which  promise,  together  with  the  injunction  of 
repentance  and  faith,  ought  promiscuously  and  without  distinction, 
to  be  declared  and  published  to  all  men  and  people  to  whom  God 
in  his  good  pleasure  sends  the  Gospel."  But  as  some  of  the  later 
Calvinists  found  themselves  perplexed  with  this  statement,  they 
began  to  differ  from  the  synod  ;  and,  allowing  that  Christ  died  for 
all  whom  he  commands  to  believe  in  him,  denied  that  God  had 
commanded  all  men  so  to  believe.  (1)  These  divines  chose  to  fall 
on  the  opposite  horn  of  the  dilemma,  and  thus  expressly  to  deny 
the  word  of  God.  Others  have  endeavoured  to  escape  the  difficulty 
by  making  faith  in  Christ  a  command  of  the  moral  law,  under  which 
even  reprobates,  as  they  take  it,  unquestionably  are,  and  argue, 
that  as  by  the  principle  of  moral  law,  all  are  bound  to  believe  every 
thing  which  God  hath  revealed,  so  by  that  law  all  are  bound  to 
believe  in  Christ,  and,  failing  of  that,  are  by  the  moral  law  justly 
condemned.  It  were  easy,  in  answer  to  this,  to  show,  that  no  man 
in  the  state  of  a  reprobate,  as  they  represent  it,  is  under  law  of  any 
kind,  except  a  law  of  necessity  to  do  evil ;  but  waiving  this,  it  wen 
as  easy  to  prove,  that,  because  the  moral  law  obliges  us,  "  in  prin- 

(fl)  Act.  Syn.  Dord.  part  1,  cap.  2.  art.  5.     (1)  Vide  Womack's  Arcana  Do<r- 
matum.  p.  67 


24  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

ciple,"  to  do  all  which  God  commands,  the  command  to  the  Jews 
to  circumcise  their  children  was  a  command  of  the  moral  law,  as 
that  to  believe  in  Christ  is  a  command  of  the  moral  law,  because, 
in  principle,  it  obliges  us  to  believe  what  God  has  revealed.  But 
should  it  be  admitted  that  all  are  bound,  by  the  moral  law,  to  believe 
all  that  God  reveals,  yet,  according  to  them,  it  is  not  revealed  that 
Christ  died  for  all ;  this  we  contend  for,  but  they  contend  against : 
all  are  not,  upon  that  very  principle,  therefore,  bound  to  believe 
that  Christ  died  for  them.  Farther,  those  who  hold  this  notion, 
contend  that  the  moral  law  commands  us  to  do  a  thing  impossible, 
and  contrary  to  truth ;  and  thus  they  fall  upon  the  other  horn  of 
the  dilemma. 

The  last  class  of  texts  we  have  adduced  in  favour  of  general 
redemption  consist  of  those  which  impute  the  blame  and  fault  of 
their  non-salvation  to  men  themselves.  If  Christ  died  for  all  men, 
so  as  to  make  their  salvation  practicable,  then  the  fault,  according 
to  the  doctrine  of  Scripture,  lies  in  themselves  ;  if  he  died  not  so  for 
them  that  they  may  be  saved,  then  the  bar  to  their  salvation  lies  out 
of  themselves,  and  in  the  absence  of  any  saving  provision  for  them 
in  the  Gospel,  which  is  contrary  to  the  doctrine  of  Scripture. 

We  enter  not  now  upon  the  questions  of  the  invincibility  of  grace, 
and  free  and  bound  will.  These  will  come  under  consideration  in 
their  place  ;  and  we  now  confine  ourselves  to  the  argument,  as  it 
is  grounded  upon  texts  of  this  class,  as  given  above.  The  common 
reply  to  our  argument,  grounded  upon  these  texts,  at  least  among 
the  more  moderate  kind  of  Calvinists,  is,  that  the  fault  is  indeed  in 
the  will  of  man,  and  that  if  men  willed  to  come  to  Christ,  that  they 
might  have  life,  they  would  have  life  ;  and  thus,  they  would  have  it 
understood,  that  the  argument  is  answered.  This,  however,  we 
deny :  they  have  neither  refuted  it,  nor  escaped  its  force ;  and 
nothing  which  is  thus  apparently  conceded  weakens  the  force  of 
the  conclusion,  that  if  the  bar  to  men's  salvation  be  wholly  in  them- 
selves, it  lies  not  in  the  want  of  a  provision  made  for  their  salvation 
in  the  Gospel ;  and  therefore  they  are  so  interested  in  the  death  of 
Christ,  that  they  may  be  saved  by  it. 

For  let  us  put  the  case  as  to  the  non-elect,  who  are  indeed  the 
persons  in  question.  Either  it  is  possible  for  them  to  will  to  come 
to  Christ,  and  to  believe  in  him  ;  or  it  is  not.  If  the  former,  then 
they  may  come  to  Christ,  and  believe  in  him,  without  obtaining  life 
and  salvation  ;  for  he  can  dispense  these  blessings  only  to  those  for 
whom  he  purchased  them,  which,  it  is  contended,  he  did  for  the 
elect  only.  If  the  latter,  then  the  bar  to  their  salvation  is  not  in 
themselves  ;  but  in  that  which  makes  it  impossible  for  them  to  will 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  25 

to  come  to  Christ,  and  to  believe  in  him.  If  it  be  said,  that  though 
this  is  impossible  to  them,  yet  that  still  the  bar  is  in  themselves, 
because  it  is  in  the  obstinacy  and  perverseness  of  their  own  wills, 
we  ask,  whether  the  natural  will  of  the  elect  is  so  much  better  than 
that  of  the  reprobate,  that  by  virtue  of  that  better  natural  will,  they 
come  to  Christ,  and  believe  in  him?  This  they  will  deny,  and 
ascribe  their  willing,  and  coming  to  Christ,  and  believing  in  him, 
to  the  influence  only  of  Divine  grace.  It  will  follow  then,  from  this, 
that  the  bar  to  this  same  kind  of  willing,  and  believing,  on  the  part 
of  the  reprobate,  lies  not  in  themselves,  where  the  Scriptures  con- 
stantly place  it,  and  so  charge  it  upon  men  as  their  fault,  and  the 
reason  of  their  condemnation ;  but  in  something  without  them,  even 
in  the  determination  and  decree  of  God  not  to  bestow  upon  them, 
that  influence  of  his  grace,  by  which  this  good  will,  and  this  power 
to  believe  in  Christ,  are  wrought  in  the  elect :  which  is  precisely 
what  the  synod  of  Dort  has  affirmed.  "  This  was  the  most  free 
counsel,  gracious  will,  and  intention  of  God  the  Father ;  that  the 
lively  and  saving  efficacy  of  the  most  precious  death  of  his  Soil 
should  manifest  itself  in  all  the  elect,  for  the  bestowing  upon  them 
only,  justifying  faith ;  and  bringing  them  infallibly  by  it  unto 
eternal  life."(2)  This  doctrine  cannot,  therefore,  be  true  ;  for  the 
Scriptures  plainly  place  the  bar  to  the  salvation  of  them  that  are 
lost,  in  themselves,  and  charge  the  fault  only  on  the  wilful  disobe- 
dience and  unbelief  of  men  ;  whilst  this  opinion  places  it  in  the 
refusal,  on  the  part  of  God,  to  bestow  that  grace  upon  the  non-elect, 
by  which  alone  the  evil  of  their  natural  will  can  be  removed. 

Nor  is  this  in  the  least  remedied  by  arguing,  that  as  Christ  Is 
rejected  freely  and  voluntarily  by  the  natural  will  of  man,  the  guilt 
is  still  chargeable  upon  himself.  For,  not  here  to  anticipate  what 
may  be  said  on  the  freedom  of  the  will,  it  is  confessed  by  Calvinists 
that  the  will  of  the  reprobate  is  not  free  to  choose  to  come  to 
Christ,  and  believe  in  him,  since  without  grace,  not  even  the  elect 
can  do  this.  But  if  it  were  free  to  choose  Christ,  and  believe  in 
him,  the  not  doing  it  would  not  be  chargeable  upon  them  as  a  fault 
For  they  do  not  reject  Christ  as  a  Saviour,  since  he  is  not  offered 
to  them  as  such  ;  and  they  sin  not,  by  not  believing,  that  is,  by  not 
trusting  in  Christ  for  salvation.  For  as  it  is  not  the  will  of  God 
that,  they  should  so  believe,  they  violate  no  command  given  to  them 
to  believe,  unless  it  be  held  that  God  commands  them  to  do  that 
which  he  wills  they  should  not  do  ;  which  is  only  absurdly  to  say 
that  he  wills,  and  he  does  not  will  the  same  thing.  And  seeing  that 
his  commands  are  the  declarations  of  his  will,  if  the  command 


(2)  Cap.  2,  Art.  8 
v.,     HI.  1 


26  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

reaches  to  them,  it  is  a  declaration  that  he  wills  that  concerning 
them,  which,  on  this  system,  he  does  not  will ;  and  this  contradic- 
tion all  are  bound  to  maintain,  who  charge  the  want  of  faith,  as  a 
fault  upon  those  to  whom  the  power  of  believing  is  not  imparted. 

But  the  argument  from  this  class  of  texts  is  not  exhausted.  They 
not  only  place  that  bar  and  fault  which  prevents  the  salvation  of 
men  in  themselves;  but  they  as  expressly  exclude  God  from  all. 
participation  in  it,  contrary  to  the  doctrine  before  us.  "  He  willeth 
all  men  to  be  saved ;"  he  has  "no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  him  that 
dieth."  "  He  sent  his  Son  not  to  condemn  the  world,  but  that  the 
World  through  him  might  be  saved  ;"  and  he  invites  all,  beseeches 
all,  obtests  all,  and  makes  even  his  threatenings  merciful,  since  he 
interposes  them  to  prevent  men  from  going  on  still  in  their  trespasses^ 
and  involving  themselves  in  final  ruin. 

Perhaps  not  many  Calvinists  in  the  present  day  are  disposed  to 
resort  to  the  ancient  subterfuge,  of  a  secret  and  a  revealed  will  of 
God ;  (3)  and  yet  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  they  can  avoid 
admitting  this  notion,  without  totally  denying  that  which  is  so  clearly 
written,  that  God  "  willeth  all  men  to  be  saved,  and  to  come  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  truth ;"  and  that  he  commands,  by  his  apostle, 
that  prayers  should  be  made  "  for  all  men."  The  universality  of 
such  declarations  has  already  been  established  ;  and  no  way  is  left 
for  escaping  the  difficulty  in  this  direction.  The  incompatibility  of 
such  declarations,  with  the  limited  extent  of  Christ's  death,  is  there- 
fore obvious,  unless  the  term  "  ivill"  can  be  modified.  But  if  God 
declares  his  will  in  absolute  terms,  whilst  he  has  yet  secret  reserves 
of  a  contrary  kind,  (to  say  nothing  of  the  injury  done,  by  such  a 
notion,  to  the  character  of  the  God  of  truth,  whose  words  are 
without  dross  of  falsehood,  "  as  silver  tried  in  a  furnace  of  earth, 
purified  seven  times  ;")  this  is  to  will  that  all  men  may  be  saved  in 
u-ord,  and  yet  not  to  will  it  in  fact,  which  is  in  truth  not  to  will  it  at 
all.  No  subtlety  of  distinction  can  reconcile  this.  Nor,  according 
to  tins  scheme  of  doctrine,  can  God  in  any  way,  will  the  salvation 
of  the  non-elect.  It  is  only  under  one  condition,  that  he  wills  the 
salvation  of  any  man  :  namely,  through  the  death  of  Christ.  His 
justice  required  this  atonement  for  sin  ;  and  he  could  not  will  man 
to  be  saved  to  the  dishonour  of  his  justice.  If  then  that  atonement 
does  not  extend  to  all  men,  he  cannot  will  the  salvation  of  all  men  ; 
for  such  of  them  as  are  not  interested  in  this  atonement,  could  not 
be  saved  consistently  with  his  righteous  administration,  and  he  could 
not,  therefore,  will  it.     If,  then,  he  wills  the  non-elect  to  be  savedr 

(3)  The  scholastic  terms  are  voluntas  signi,  and  voluntas  bene  plariti.a.  signified 
or  revealed  will,  and  a  will  of  pleasure  or  purple 


SECOKD.  |  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  2" 

In  any  sense,  he  must  will  this  independently  of  Christ's  sacrifice  for 
sins ;  and  if  he  cannot  will  this  for  the  reason  just  given,  he  cannot 
"  will  all  men  to  be  saved,"  which  is  contrary  to  the  texts  quoted  : 
he  cannot,  therefore,  invite  all  to  be  saved ;  he  cannot  beseech  all 
by  his  ministers  to  be  reconciled  to  him ;  for  these  acts  could  only 
proceed  from  his  willing  them  to  be  saved  :  and  for  the  same  reason, 
"  all  men"  ought  not  to  be  prayed  for  by  those  who  hold  this  doc- 
trine, since  they  assume,  that  it  is  not  the  will  of  God  that  all  men 
should  be  saved.  Thus  they  repeal  the  apostle's  precept,  as  well 
as  the  principle  upon  which  it  is  built,  by  mere  human  authority ; 
or  else  they  so  interpret  the  principle,  as  to  impeach  the  truth  of 
God,  and  so  practise  the  precept,  as  to  indulge  reserves  in  their 
own  mind,  similar  to  those  they  feign  to  be  in  the  mind  of  God. 
Whilst,  therefore,  it  remains  on  record,  that  "  God  willeth  all  men 
to  be  saved,  and  to  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  ;"  and  that 
he  "  willeth  not  that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to 
repentance,"  it  must  be  concluded,  that  Christ  died  for  all ;  and 
that  the  reason  of  the  destruction  of  any  part  of  our  race  lies  not 
in  the  want  of  a  provision  for  their  salvation  ;  not  in  any  limitation 
of  the  purchase  of  Christ,  and  the  administration  of  his  grace  ;  but 
in  their  obstinate  rejection  of  both. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

The  same  Subject  Continued. 

So  far,  then,  we  have  advanced  in  this  discussion  as  to  show, 
that  whilst  no  passage  of  Scripture  can  be  adduced,  or  is  even 
pretended  to  exist,  which  declares  that  Christ  did  not  die  equally 
for  all  men,  there  are  numerous  passages  which  explicitly,  and  in 
terms  which  cannot,  by  any  fair  interpretation,  be  wrested  from  that, 
meaning,  declare  the  contrary  ;  and  that  there  are  others,  as  nume- 
rous, which  contain  the  doctrine  by  necessary  implication  and 
inference.  To  implication  and  inference  the  Calvinist  divines  also 
resort,  and  the  more  so,  as  they  have  not  a  direct  text  in  favour  of 
their  scheme.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  in  order  to  obtain  a  com- 
prehensive view  of  this  controversy,  compressed  into  as  narrow 
limits  as  possible,  to  examine  those  parts  of  Scripture  which,  ac- 
cording to  their  inferential  interpretations,  limit  not  merely  the 
actual,  but  the  intentional  efficacy  of  the  death  of  Christ  to  the 
elect  only. 

The  first  are  those  passages  which  treat  of  persons,  said  to  be 
elected,  foreknown,  and  predestinated  to  the  spiritual  and  celestial 


28  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PAR'I 

blessing's  of  the  new  dispensation  ;  and  the  argument  from  the  texts 
in  which  these  distinctions  occur,  is,  that  the  persons  so  called, 
elected,  foreknown,  and  predestinated,  are,  by  that  very  distinction, 
marked  out  as  the  only  persons  to  whom  the  death  of  Christ  inten- 
tionally extends. 

We  reserve  it  to  another  place  to  state  the  systematic  views  which 
the  followers  of  Calvin,  in  their  different  shades  of  opinion,  take  of 
the  doctrines  of  election,  &c,  lest  our  more  simple  inquiry  into  the 
sense  of  Scripture  should  be  disturbed  by  extraneous  topics  ;  and 
we  are  now,  therefore,  merely  called  to  consider,  how  far  this 
argument,  which  is  professedly  drawn  from  Scripture  and  not  from 
metaphysical  principles,  is  supported  or  refuted,  by  an  examination 
of  those  portions  of  Holy  Writ  on  which  it  is  usually  built :  and  it 
will  not  prove  a  difficult  task  to  show,  that,  when  fairly  interpreted, 
they  contain  nothing  which  obliges  us  to  narrow  our  interpretation 
of  those  passages  which  extend  the  benefit  of  the  death  of  Christ  to 
all  mankind ;  and  that,  in  some  views,  they  strongly  corroborate 
their  most  extended  meaning.  Of  a  divine  election,  or  choosing- 
and  separation  from  others,  we  have  three  kinds  mentioned  in  the 
Scriptures. 

The  first  is  the  election  of  individuals  to  perform  some  particu- 
lar and  special  service.  Cyrus  was  "  elected"  to  rebuild  the  temple  ; 
the  twelve  apostles  were  "chosen,"  elected,  to  their  office  by  Christ ; 
St.  Paul  was  a  "  chosen,"  or  elected,  "  vessel,"  to  be  the  apostle  of 
the  Gentiles.  This  kind  of  election  to  special  office  and  service  has, 
however,  manifestly  no  relation  to  the  limitation  of  eternal  salvation, 
either  in  respect  of  the  persons  themselves  so  chosen,  or  of  others. 
With  respect  to  themselves,  it  did  not  confer  upon  them  an  absolute 
security.  One  of  the  twelve  elected  apostles  was  Judas,  who  fell 
and  was  lost ;  and  St.  Paul  confesses  his  own  personal  liability  to 
become  "a  castaway,"  after  all  his  zeal  and  abundant  labours. 
With  respect  to  others,  the  twelve  apostles,  and  St.  Paul  afterwards, 
were  "elected"  to  preach  the  Gospel  in  order  to  the  salvation  of  all 
to  whom  they  had  access. 

The  second  kind  of  election  which  we  find  in  Scripture,  is  the 
election  of  nations,  or  bodies  of  people,  to  eminent  religious  privi- 
leges, and  in  order  to  accomplish,  by  their  superior  illumination,  the 
merciful  purposes  of  God,  in  benefiting  other  nations  or  bodies  of 
people.  Thus  the  descendants  of  Abraham,  the  Jews,  were  chosen 
to  receive  special  revelations  of  truth ;  and  to  be  "  the  people  of 
God,"  to  be  his  visible  church,  and  publicly  to  observe  and  uphold 
his  worship.  "  The  Lord  thy  God  hath  chosen  thee  to  be  a  peculiar 
people  unto  himself,  above  all  people  that  are  upon  the  face  of  the 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES,  2(3 

earth."  "  The  Lord  had  a  delight  in  thy  fathers  to  love  them,  and 
he  chose  their  seed  after  them,  even  you,  above  all  people."  It  was 
especially  on  account  of  the  application  of  the  terms  elect,  chosen, 
and  peculiar,  to  the  Jewish  people,  that  they  were  so  familiarly 
used  by  the  apostles  in  their  epistles  addressed  to  the  believing  Jews 
and  Gentiles,  then  constituting  the  church  of  Christ  in  various 
places.  For  Christians  were  the  subjects,  also,  of  this  second  kind 
of  election  ;  the  election  of  bodies  of  men  to  be  the  visible  people 
and  church  of  God  in  the  world,  and  to  be  endowed  with  peculiar 
privileges.  Thus  they  became,  though  in  a  more  special  and  exalted 
sense,  the  chosen  people,  the  elect  of  God.  We  say  in  a  more 
special  sense,  because  as  the  entrance  into  the  Jewish  church  was 
by  natural  birth,  and  the  entrance  into  the  Christian  church,  properly 
so  called,  is  by  faith  and  a  spiritual  birth,  these  terms,  although  many 
became  Christians  by  mere  profession,  and  enjoyed  various  privi- 
leges in  consequence  of  their  people  or  nation  being  chosen  to 
receive  the  Gospel,  have  generally  respect,  in  the  New  Testament, 
to  bodies  of  true  believers,  or  to  the  whole  body  of  true  believers 
as  such.  They  are  not,  therefore,  to  be  interpreted,  according  to 
the  scheme  of  Dr.  Taylor,  of  Norwich,  by  the  constitution  of  the 
Jewish,  but  by  the  constitution  of  the  Christian  church. 

To  understand  the  nature  of  this  "  election,"  as  applied  some- 
times to  particular  bodies  of  Christians,  as  when  St.  Peter  says, 
"  the  church  which  is  at  Babylon,  elected  together  with  you,"  and 
sometimes  to  the  whole  body  of  believers  every  where ;  and  also 
the  reason  of  the  frequent  use  of  the  term  election,  and  of  the  occur- 
rence of  allusions  to  the  fact,  it  is  to  be  remembered,  that  a  great 
religious  revolution,  so  to  speak,  had  occurred  in  the  age  of  the 
apostles  ;  with  the  full  import  of  which  we  cannot,  without  calling 
in  the  aid  of  a  little  reflection,  be  adequately  impressed.  This  was 
no  other  than  the  abrogation  of  the  church  state  of  the  Jews, 
which  had  continued  for  so  many  ages.  They  had  been  the  onI\ 
visibly  acknowledged  people  of  God  in  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  ; 
for  whatever  pious  people  might  have  existed  in  other  nations,  they 
were  not,  in  the  sight  of  men,  and  collectively,  acknowledged  as 
"  the  people  of  Jehovah."  They  had  no  written  revelations,  no 
appointed  ministry,  no  forms  of  authorized  initiation  into  his  church 
and  covenant,  no  appointed  holy  days,  no  sanctioned  ritual.  All 
these  were  peculiar  to  the  Jews,  who  were,  therefore,  an  elected 
and  peculiar  people.  This  distinguished  honour  they  were  about 
to  lose.  They  might  have  retained  it,  had  they,  by  believing  the 
Gospel,  admitted  the  believing  Gentiles  of  all  nations  to  share  it 
with  them  ;  but  the  great  reason  of  their  peculiarity  and  election. 


SO  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

as  a  nation,  was  terminated  by  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  who  was 
to  be  "  a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles,"  as  well  as  "  the  glory  of  his 
people  Israel."  Their  pride  and  consequent  unbelief  resented  this, 
which  will  explain  their  enmity  to  the  believing  part  of  the  Gentiles, 
who,  when  that  which  St.  Paul  calls  "  the  fellowship  of  the  mystery" 
was  fully  explained,  chiefly  by  the  glorious  ministry  of  that  apostle 
himself,  were  called  into  this  church  relation  and  state  of  visible 
acknowledgment  as  the  people  of  God,  which  the  Jews  had  for- 
merly enjoyed,  and  that  with  even  a  higher  degree  of  glory,  in  pro- 
portion to  the  superior  spirituality  of  the  new  dispensation.  It  was 
this  doctrine  which  excited  that  strong  irritation  in  the  minds  of  the 
unbelieving  Jews,  and  in  some  partially  Christianized  ones,  to  which 
so  many  references  are  made  in  the  New  Testament.  They  were 
"  provoked,"  were  made  "  jealous ;"  and  were  often  roused  to  the 
madness  of  persecuting  opposition  by  it.  There  was  then  a  new 
election  of  a  new  people  of  God,  to  be  composed  of  Jews,  not 
by  virtue  of  their  natural  descent,  but  of  their  faith  in  Christ, 
and  of  Gentiles  of  all  nations,  also  believing,  and  put,  as  believers, 
on  equal  ground  with  the  believing  Jews ;  and  there  was  also  a 
rejection,  a  reprobation,  if  the  term  please  any  one  better;  but 
not  an  absolute  one  :  for  the  election  was  offered  to  the  Jews 
first,  in  every  place,  by  offering  them  the  Gospel.  Some  embraced 
it,  and  submitted  to  be  the  elect  people  of  God,  on  the  new  ground 
of  faith,  instead  of  the  old  one  of  natural  descent ;  and  therefore 
the  apostle,  Rom.  xi,  7,  calls  the  believing  part  of  the  Jews,  "  the 
election,"  in  opposition  to  those  who  opposed  this  "election  of 
grace,"  and  still  clung  to  their  former  and  now  repealed  election  as 
Jews  and  the  descendants  of  Abraham ; — "  but  the  election  hath 
obtained  it,  and  the  rest  were  blinded."  The  offer  had  been  made 
to  the  whole  nation  ;  all  might  have  joined  the  one  body  of  believ- 
ing Jews  and  believing  Gentiles  ;  but  the  major  part  of  them  refused : 
they  would  not  "  come  in  to  the  supper  ;"  they  made  "  light  of  it;" 
light  of  an  election  founded  on  faith,  and  which  placed  the  relation 
of  "  the  people  of  God"  upon  spiritual  attainments,  and  offered  to 
them  only  spiritual  blessings.  They  were,  therefore,  deprived  of 
election  and  church  relationship  of  every  kind : — their  temple  was 
burned  ;  their  political  state  abolished  ;  their  genealogies  confound- 
ed ;  their  worship  annihilated ;  and  all  visible  acknowledgment  of 
them  by  God  as  a  church  withdrawn,  and  transferred  to  a  church 
henceforward  to  be  composed  chiefly  of  Gentiles  :  and  thus,  says 
St.  Paul,  Rom.  x,  19,  "were  fulfilled  the  words  of  Moses,  I  will 
provoke  you  to  jealousy  by  them  that  are  no  people,  and  by  a  foolish 
(Ignorant  and  idolatrous)  people  I  will  anger  you." 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  31 

It  is  easy  now  to  see  what  is  the  import  of  the  "  calling"  and 
"  election"  of  the  Christian  church,  as  spoken  of  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament. It  was  not  the  calling  and  the  electing  of  one  nation  in 
particular  to  succeed  the  Jews ;  but  it  was  the  calling  and  the 
electing  of  believers  in  all  nations,  wherever  the  Gospel  should  be 
preached,  to  be  in  reality  what  the  Jews  had  been  but  typically,  and, 
therefore,  in  an  inferior  degree,  the  visible  church  of  God,  "his 
people,"  under  Christ  "  the  Head ;"  with  an  authenticated  revela- 
tion ;  with  an  appointed  ministry,  never  to  be  lost ;  with  authorized 
worship ;  with  holy  days  and  festivals ;  with  instituted  forms  of 
initiation  ;  and  with  special  protection  and  favour. 

This  second  kind  of  election  being  thus  explained,  we  may  inquire, 
whether  any  thing  arises  out  of  it,  either  as  it  respects  the  Jewish 
church,  or  the  Christian  church,  which  obliges  us  in  any  degree  to 
limit  the  explicit  declarations  of  Scripture,  as  to  the  universal  extent 
of  the  intentional  benefit  of  the  atonement  of  Christ. 

With  respect  to  the  ancient  election  of  the  Jews  to  be  the  pecu- 
liar people  and  visible  church  of  God,  we  may  observe, 

1 .  That  it  did  not  argue  such  a  limitation  of  the  saving  mercy  of 
God  to  them,  as  that  their  election  secured  the  salvation  of  every 
Jew  individually.  This  Avill  be  acknowledged  by  all ;  for,  as  the 
foundation  of  their  church  state  was  their  natural  relation  to  Abra- 
ham, and  our  Lord,  with  allusion  to  this,  says  to  Nicodemus,  "  that 
which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh,"  none  of  them  could  be  saved  by 
virtue  of  being  "  Jews  outwardly." 

2.  That  it  did  not  argue,  that  sufficient,  though  not  equal  means 
of  salvation,  were  not  left  to  the  non-elected  Gentile  nations.  These 
were  still  a  "  law  unto  themselves ;"  and  "  in  every  nation,"  says 
St.  Peter,  "he  that  feareth  God,  and  worketh  righteousness,  is 
accepted  with  him." 

3.  That,  so  far  from  the  election  of  the  Jewish  nation  arguing 
that  the  mercy  of  God  was  restrained  from  the  Gentile  nations,  it. 
is  manifest  that,  great  reason  as  the  Almighty  had  to  be  provoked 
by  their  idolatries,  the  election  of  the  Jews  was  intended  for  their 
benefit  also  ;  that  it  was  not  only  designed  to  preserve  truth,  but  to 
diffuse  it,  and  to  counteract  the  spread  of  superstition  and  idolatry. 
The  miracles  wrought  from  age  to  age  among  them,  exalted  "  Jeho- 
vah" above  the  gods  of  the  heathen  ;  rays  of  light  from  their  sacred 
books  and  institutions  spread  far  beyond  themselves  ;  the  temple  of 
Solomon  had  its  court  of  the  Gentiles,  and  the  "  stranger"  from  "  a 
far  country"  had  access  to  it,  and  enjoyed  his  right  of  praying  to  the 
true  God  ;  their  captivities  and  dispersions  wondrously  fulfilled  the 
purposes  of  justice  as  to  them,  and  of  mercy  as  to  the  nations  into 


•32  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES-  [PART 

which  they  were  carried  ;  and  their  whole  history  bore  an  illustrious 
part  in  that  series  of  the  Divine  dispensations  by  which  the  Gentile 
world  was  prepared  for  the  coming  of  Christ,  and  the  establishment 
of  his  religion.  This  subject  has  already  been  adverted  to  and  illus- 
trated in  the  first  part  of  this  work.  Jerusalem  was,  in  an  inferior 
sense,  literally  "  the  joy  of  the  whole  earth  ;"  and  "  in  the  seed  of 
Abraham,"  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  have,  in  all  ages,  in  some 
degree,  been  blessed. 

With  respect  to  the  "  election"  of  the  Christian  church,  we  also 
observe, 

1 .  That  neither  does  its  election  suppose  such  a  special  grace  of 
God,  as  secures  infallibly  the  salvation  of  every  one  of  its  members  ; 
that  is,  in  other  words,  of  every  elected  person.  For  to  pass  over 
the  case  of  those  who  are  Christians  but  in  name,  even  true  Chris- 
tians are  exhorted  to  give  diligence  to  make  their  "calling  and 
election  sure  ;"  and  are  warned  against  "  turning  back  to  perdition." 
We  have  also  seen,  in  the  case  of  the  apostates  mentioned  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  that,  in  point  of  fact,  some  of  those  who 
had  thus  been  actually  elected,  and  brought  into  a  state  of  salvation, 
had  fallen  away  into  a  condition  of  extreme  hazard,  or  of  utter 
hopelessness. 

2.  That  the  election  of  Christians,  as  members  of  the  church  of 
Christ,  concludes  nothing  against  the  saving  mercy  of  God  being 
still  exercised  as  to  those  who  are  not  of  the  church.  Even  the 
Calvinists  cannot  deny  this  ;  for  many  who  are  not  now  of  the  body 
of  the  visible  and  true  church  of  Christ,  may,  according  to  their 
scheme,  be  yet  called  and  chosen  into  that  body,  and  thus  partake 
of  an  election  which,  whilst  they  are  notoriously  wicked  and  alien 
from  the  church  of  Christ,  they  do  not  actually  partake  of,  whatever 
may  be  the  secret  purposes  of  God  concerning  them. 

3.  That  Christians  are  thus  elected,  and  made  the  church  of  God, 
not  in  consequence  of  others  being  excluded  from  the  compassions 
and  redeeming  mercy  of  Christ ;  but  for  their  benefit  and  salvation, 
that  they  also  may  be  called  into  the  fellowship  of  the  Gospel.  "  Ye 
are  the  light  of  the  world  ;"  "  ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth."  But  in 
what  sense  could  the  church  be  "  the  light  of  the  world,"  were 
there  no  capacity  in  the  world  to  receive  the  same  light  with  which 
it  is  itself  enlightened  1  or  "  the  salt  of  the  earth,"  if  it  did  not  exist 
for  the  purifying  of  the  mass  beyond  itself,  with  the  same  purity  1 
Yet  if  such  a  capacity  exists  in  "  the  world,"  it  is  from  the  grace  of 
God  alone  that  it  derives  it,  and  not  from  nature  ;  a  grace  which 
could  be  imparted  to  the  world  only  in  consequence  of  the  death  of 
Christ.     Thus  nothing  is  to  be  aruued  from  the  actual  election  of 


SECOND. 


THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  33 


the  Christian  church,  as  God's  visible  and  acknowledged  people  on 
earth,  in  favour  of  the  doctrine  that  election  limits  the  benefits  of 
our  Lord's  atonement ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  this  election  of  the 
church  has,  for  one  of  its  final  causes,  the  illumination  of  the  world. 
But  as  Calvinistic  commentators  have  so  generally  confounded  this 
collective  election  with  personal  election,  (a  doctrine  to  which,  in  its 
proper  place,  we  shall  presently  advert,)  and  have,  in  consequence, 
misunderstood  and  misinterpreted  the  argument  of  St.  Paul,  in  the 
ix,  x,  and  xi  chapters  of  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans  :  this  celebrated 
discourse  of  the  apostle  requires  to  be  briefly  examined. 

Let  the  reader,  then,  take  the  epistle  in  his  hand,  and  follow  the 
argument  in  these  chapters,  with  reference  to  the  determining  of 
the  two  main  questions  at  issue,  namely,  whether  personal  or  col- 
lective election  be  the  subject  of  the  apostle's  discourse  ;  and 
whether  the  election,  of  which  he  speaks,  of  whatever  kind  it  may 
be,  is,  in  the  sense  of  the  Calvinists,  unconditional. 

Let  us  examine  the  discourse,  first,  with  reference  to  the  question 
of  personal  or  collective  election. 

It  is  acknowledged  by  all,  that,  whatever  other  subjects  the 
apostle  may  or  may  not  connect  with  it,  he  treats  of  the  casting  oft' 
of  the  Jews,  as  the  visible  church  of  God,  and  the  calling  of  the 
Gentiles  into  that  relation.  For  the  case  of  the  Jews  he  expresses 
great  "  sorrow  of  heart ;"  not  indeed  because  God  had  now  deter- 
mined to  compose  his  visible  church  upon  a  new  principle,  that  of 
faith,  and  to  constitute  it  no  longer  upon  that  of  natural  descent 
from  Abraham  ;  for  to  announce  this  doctrine  St.  Paul  was  chosen 
to  be  an  apostle,  and  to  call,  by  earnest  and  extensive  labours,  not 
only  the  Gentiles,  but  the  Jews  thankfully  to  submit  to  it,  by  re- 
ceiving the  Gospel :  but  he  had  great  "  sorrow  of  heart,"  both  on 
account  of  their  having  rejected  this  gracious  offer,  and  of  the 
calamities  which  the  approaching  destruction  of  their  nation  would 
bring  upon  them,  ver.  1,  2.  The  enumeration  which  he  makes  in 
verses  4  and  5,  of  the  religious  honours  and  privileges  of  the  Jewish 
nation,  whilst  it  remained  a  church  accomplishing  the  purposes  of 
God,  shows  that  he  did  not  intend,  by  proclaiming  the  new  founda- 
tion on  which  God  would  now  construct  his  church,  and  elect  to 
himself  a  people  out  of  all  nations,  to  detract  at  all  from  the  divinity 
or  glory  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation. 

The  objection  made,  in  the  minds  of  the  Jews,  to  this  doctrine 
of  the  abolition  of  the  Jewish  visible  church  as  founded  upon  descent 
from  Abraham,  in  the  line  of  Isaac,  was,  as  we  may  collect  from 
ver.  6,  that  it  was  contrary  to  the  word  and  promise  of  God  made 
to  Abraham.  This  objection  St.  Paul  first  refutes :—"  Not  as 
Vol.  III.  5 


34  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

though  the  word  of  God  hath  taken  none  effect,"  literally  "  has 
fallen,"  or  "fallen  to  the  ground,"  that  is,  has  not  been  accomplish- 
ed ;  or  as  though  this  election  of  a  new  church,  composed  only  of 
believing  Jews  and  Gentiles,  was  contrary  to  the  promises  made  to 
Abraham,  Gen.  xvii,  7,  8,  "  I  will  establish  my  covenant  between 
me  and  thee,  for  an  everlasting  covenant,  to  be  a  God  unto  thee, 
and  to  thy  seed  after  thee."  This  he  proves,  from  several  events, 
which  the  Jews  could  not  deny,  as  being  in  the  records  of  their  own 
history.  By  these  facts  he  shows,  that  the  exclusion  of  a  part  of 
the  seed  of  Abraham,  at  various  times,  from  being  the  visible  church 
of  God,  was  not,  as  the  Jews  themselves  must  allow,  any  violation 
of  the  covenant  with  Abraham.  He  first  instances  the  case  of  the 
descendants  of  Jacob  himself,  although  he  was  the  son  of  Isaac. 
':'  All  are  not  Israel,  (God's  visible  church  and  acknowledged  peo- 
ple,) who  are  of  Israel,"  or  Jacob  ;  for  a  great  part  of  the  ten  tribes 
who  had  been  carried  into  captivity  before  the  Babylonian  invasion 
of  Judah,  had  never  returned,  had  never  been  again  collected  into 
a  people,  and  had,  for  ages,  been  cast  out  of  their  ancient  church 
state  and  relation,  though,  by  natural  descent,  they  were  "of  Israel," 
that  is,  descendants  of  Jacob. 

From  Jacob  he  ascends  to  Abraham,  ver.  7  :  "  Neither,  because 
they  are  the  seed  of  Abraham,  are  they  all  children,"  that  is,  Abra- 
ham's "  seed"  in  the  sense  of  the  promise  ;  "  but  in  Isaac,"  not  in 
Ishmael,  "shall  thy  seed  be  called;"  "that  is,  they  which  are  the 
children  of  the  flesh,"  Ishmael  by  Hagar,  and  his  descendants, 
'?  these  are  not  the  children  of  God.  But  the  children  of  the  pro- 
mise," Isaac,  born  of  Sarah,  and  his  descendants,  "  are  counted  for 
the  seed,"  meaning,  obviously,  for  that  seed  to  whom  the  promise 
refers.  He  gives  a  third  instance  of  this  election  and  exclusion 
taken  from  the  children  of  Isaac,  ver.  10-13,  "  And  not  only  this  ; 
but  when  Rebecca,  also  had  conceived  by  one,  even  by  our  father 
Isaac ;  (for  the  children  being  not  yet  born,  neither  having  done 
good  or  evil,  that  the  purpose  of  God  according  to  election,"  the 
election  of  one  in  preference  to  the  other,  "  might  stand,  not  of 
works,  but  of  him  that  calleth ;)  it  was  said  unto  her,  The  elder 
shall  serve  the  younger.  As  it  is  written,  Jacob  have  I  loved,  but 
Esau  have  I  hated."  On  this  last  passage,  so  often  perverted  to 
serve  the  system  of  Calvinian  election  and  reprobation,  a  few 
remarks  more  at  large  may  be  allowed. 

1.  The  argument  of  the  apostle,  of  which  this  instance  is  in 
continuance,  requires  us  to  understand  that  he  is  still  speaking  of 
"  the  seed"  intended  in  the  promise,  which  did  not  comprise  all  the 
descendants  either  of  Abraham,  or  Isaac,  or  Jacob,  for  he  bring? 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  35 

instances  of  exclusion  from  each  ;  but  such  as  Cod  elected  to  be 
his  visible  church :  he  is  not  therefore  speaking  of  the  personal 
election  or  rejection  of  Isaac,  or  Ishmael,  or  Jacob,  or  Esau  ;  but 
of  their  descendants  in  certain  lines,  as  elected  to  be  the  acknow- 
ledged church  of  God. 

2.  This  is  proved,  also,  from  those  passages  in  the  history  of 
Moses,  which  furnish  the  facts  on  which  the  apostle  reasons,  and 
which  he  quotes  briefly  as  being  well  known  to  the  Jews.  "  As  it 
is  written,  The  elder  shall  serve  the  younger."  Now  this  is  written, 
Gen.  xxv,  23,  "  Two  nations  are  in  thy  womb,  and  two  manner 
of  people  shall  be  separated  from  thy  bowels  ;  and  the  one  people 
shall  be  stronger  than  the  other  people  ;  and  the  elder,"  the 
descendants  of  the  elder,  "  shall  serve  the  younger."  So  far,  in- 
deed, was  this  prophecy  from  being  intended  of  Esau  personally* 
that  he  himself  did  never  serve  his  brother  Jacob,  although  he 
wantonly  surrendered  to  him  Ms  birthright.  Another  passage  is 
found  in  the  prophet  Malachi,  i,  2,  3,  and  expresses  God's  dealings, 
not  with  the  individuals  Jacob  and  Esau  ;  but  with  their  descend- 
ants, who,  according  to  frequent  usage  in  Scripture,  are  called  by 
the  names  of  their  first  ancestors.  "  Was  not  Esau  Jacob's  brother  ? 
yet  I  loved  Jacob,  and  I  hated  Esau,  and  laid  his  mountains  and 
his  heritage  waste  for  the  dragons  of  the  wilderness  !"  judgments 
which  fell  not  upon  Esau  personally,  but  upon  the  Edomites  his 
descendants. 

3.  If  the  apostle,  in  this  instance  of  Jacob  and  Esau,  speaks  of 
the  rejection  or  reprobation  of  individuals,  he  says  nothing  at  all  to 
his  purpose,  because  he  is  discoursing  of  the  rejection  of  the  Jews, 
as  a  nation,  from  being  any  longer  the  visible  and  acknowledged 
church  of  God  in  the  world  ;  so  that  instances  of  individual  repro- 
bation would  have  been  impertinent  to  his  purpose.  But  to  proceed 
with  the  apostle's  discourse. 

Having  shown,  by  these  instances,  that  God  had  limited  the 
covenant  to  a  part  of  the  descendants  of  Abraham,  at  different 
periods,  he  puts  it  to  the  objecting  Jews  to  say,  whether,  on  that 
account,  there  was  a  failure  of  his  covenant  with  Abraham  ;  "What 
shall  we  say  then,  Is  there  unrighteousness  with  God  1  God  forbid." 
The  word  unrighteousness  is  usually  taken  in  the  sense  of  injustice, 
but  is  sometimes  used  in  the  sense  of  falsehood  and  unfaithfulness, 
by  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  by  the  LXX  ;  and 
in  this  sense  it  well  agrees  with  the  apostle's  reasoning ;  "  Is  there 
then  unfaithfulness  with  God,"  because  he  has  so  frequently  limited 
the  promise  made  to  the  seed  of  Abraham,  to  particular  branches 
of  that  seed  1  The  apostle  denies  that  in  this  there  was  any  wfttith- 


38  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

fulness,  or,  in  the  sense  of  injustice,  which  perhaps  is  to  be  prefer- 
red, any  "  unrighteousness  in  God  ;"  and  the  Jews  themselves  were 
bound  to  agree  with  him,  since,  as  the  apostle  adds,  it  was  a  gene- 
ral principle  laid  down  in  their  own  law,  by  the  Lawgiver  himself 
when  speaking  to  Moses,  and  by  which,  therefore,  all  such  promises 
of  special  favour  must  be  interpreted, — "  I  will  have  mercy  on 
whom  I  will  have  mercy,  and  I  will  have  compassion  on  whom  I 
will  have  compassion."  The  connexion  of  these  words,  as  they 
stand  in  Exodus  xxxiii,  19,  shows  that  the  mercy  and  grace  here 
spoken  of,  refer  not,  as  Beza  would  have  it,  to  that  mercy  exercised 
to  individuals  which  supposes  misery,  and  consists  in  the  exercise 
of  pardon ;  but  to  the  granting  of  special  favours  and  privileges. 
For  the  words  are  spoken  to  Moses,  in  answer  to  his  prayer,  "  I 
beseech  thee,  show  me  thy  glory."  To  him  God  had  before  said, 
verse  1 7,  ¥  Thou  hast  found  grace  in  my  sight,  and  I  know  thee  by 
thy  name."  He  was  not,  therefore,  in  the  case  of  a  guilty,  miserable 
man.  Nor  do  the  words  refer  to  the  forgiveness  of  the  people  at 
his  intercession.  This  had  been  done  ;  the  transaction,  as  to  them, 
had  been  finished,  as  the  history  shows ;  and  then  Moses,  encour- 
aged by  the  success  of  his  intercessions  for  them,  makes  a  bold  but 
wholly  personal  request  for  himself.  "  And  he  said,  I  beseech  thee, 
show  me  thy  glory.  And  he  said,  I  will  make  all  my  goodness  pass 
before  thee,  and  I  will  proclaim  the  name  of  the  Lord  before  thee  ; 
and  will  be  gracious,"  in  showing  these  great  condescensions,  "  to 
whom  I  will  be  gracious,  and  will  show  mercy  on  whom  I  will  show 
mercy."  God  has  a  right  to  select  whom  he  pleases  to  enjoy  spe- 
cial privileges ;  in  this  there  is  no  "  unrighteousness,"  and,  there- 
fore, in  limiting  those  favours  to  such  branches  of  Abraham's  seed, 
as  he  chose  to  elect,  neither  his  justice  nor  his  truth  was  impeached. 
This  is  obvious,  when  the  words  are  interpreted  of  the  election  of 
collective  bodies  of  men,  and  of  the  individuals  which  compose 
them,  to  peculiar  favours  and  religious  privileges  ;  whilst  yet  all 
others  have  still  the  means  of  salvation.  The  onus  lies  only  upon 
them  who  interpret  this  part  of  Scripture  of  personal  unconditional 
election  and  reprobation,  to  show  how  it  can  be  a  "  righteous"  pro- 
ceeding to  punish  men  for  not  availing  themselves  of  means  of 
salvation  which  are  never  afforded  them.  This  is  manifestly  "  un- 
righteous ;"  but  in  the  election  and  rejection  spoken  of  by  the 
apostle,  he  expressly  denies  that  there  is  "  unrighteousness  with 
God  ;"  he  does  this  in  a  solemn  manner,  "  God  forbid :"  and,  there- 
fore, the  kind  of  election  and  rejection,  of  which  he  speaks,  is  not 
the  unconditional  election  and  reprobation  of  individuals  to  or  from 
eternal  salvation. 


. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  .j? 

The  conclusion  of  the  apostle's  answer  to  the  objection  of  the 
Jews,  that  the  casting  off  a  part  of  the  Jewish  nation,  even  all  who 
did  not  believe  in  Christ,  Was  contrary  to  the  promises  made  to 
Abraham,  is,  "  So  then  it  is  not  of  him  that  willeth,  nor  of  him  that 
runneth,  but  of  God  that  showeth  mercy."  He  grants  special 
favours,  as  the  term  "  showing  mercy,"  in  the  preceding  verse,  has 
been  already  proved  to  mean  ;  and  in  granting  these  special  favours 
he  often  acts  contrary  to  the  designs  and  efforts  of  men,  and  frus- 
trates both.  The  allusion  contained  in  these  words,  to  the  case  of 
Isaac  and  Esau,  is,  therefore,  highly  beautiful  and  appropriate — 
"  it  is  not  of  him  that  to'Jleth,  nor  of  him  that  runneth"  Isaac  willed 
that  Esau,  the  first-born,  should  have  the  blessing ;  and  Esau  ran 
for  the  venison  as  the  means  of  obtaining  it ;  but  still  Jacob  obtained 
it.  The  blessing  was  not,  however,  a  personal  one,  but  referred 
to  the  people  of  whom  Jacob  was  to  be  the  progenitor,  as  the  history 
given  by  Moses  will  show.  Thus  this  case  also  affords  no  example 
of  personal  election. 

The  apostle  having  proved  that  there  was  neither  unfaithfulness 
nor  unrighteousness  in  God,  in  selecting  from  his  own  good  pleasure, 
from  his  sovereignty  if  the  term  please  better,  the  persons  to  be 
endowed  with  special  religious  honours  and  privileges,  proceeds  to 
show,  with  reference  not  only  to  the  exclusion  of  the  Jews,  as  a 
nation,  from  the  visible  church,  but  also  to  the  terrible  judgments 
which  our  Lord  himself  had  predicted,  and  which  were  about  to 
come  upon  them,  that  he  exercises  also  the  prerogative  of  making 
some  notorious  sinners,  and  especially  when  they  set  themselves  to 
oppose  his  purposes,  the  eminent  and  unequivocal  objects  of  his 
displeasure.  Here  again  he  uses  for  illustration  an  example  taken 
from  the  Jewish  Scriptures.  But  let  the  example  be  marked.  Had 
it  been  his  intention  to  show,  that  the  personal  election  of  Isaac  and 
Jacob  necessarily  implied  the  personal  reprobation  of  Ishmael  and 
Esau  ;  and  that  their  not  receiving  special  privileges  necessarily  cut 
them  off  from  salvation,  so  that  being  left  to  themselves  they  became 
objects  of  wrath,  then  would  he  have  selected  them  as  his  illustrative 
examples,  for  this  would  have  been  required  by  his  argument.  But 
he  selects  Pharaoh,  not  a  descendant  of  Abraham ;  a  person  not 
involved  in  the  cases  of  non-election  which  had  taken  place  in 
Abraham's  family  ;  but  a  notoriously  wicked  prince,  and  one  who 
resolved  to  oppose  himself  to  the  designs  of  God  in  the  deliverance 
of  Israel  from  bondage.  His  doctrine,  then,  manifestly  is,  that  when 
these  two  characters  meet  in  individuals,  or  in  nations,  notorious 
vice  and  flagrant  opposition  to  God's  plans  and  purposes,  he  often 
makes  them  the  objects  of  his  special  displeasure  ;  giving  them  up 


38  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

to  the  hardness  of  their  hearts,  and  postponing  their  destruction  to 
make  it  more  impressively  manifest  to  the  world.  In  every  respect 
Pharaoh  was  a  most  appropriate  example  to  illustrate  the  case  of 
the  body  of  the  unbelieving  Jews,  who,  when  the  apostle  wrote, 
were  under  the  sentence  of  a  terrible  excision.  Pharaoh  had 
several  times  hardened  his  own  heart ;  now  God  hardens  it,  that  is, 
in  Scripture  language,  withdraws  his  all  gracious  interposition,  and 
gives  him  up.  So  the  Jews  had  hardened  their  hearts  against 
repeated  calls  of  Christ  and  his  apostles ;  now  God  was  about  to 
give  them  up,  as  a  nation,  to  destruction.  Pharaoh  was  not  sud- 
denly cut  off,  but  was  spared ;  "  for  this  same  purpose  have  I 
raised  thee  up"  from  the  effect  of  so  many  plagues  ;  that  is,  I  have 
not  destroyed  thee  outright.  The  LXX  translate,  "  thou  hast  been 
preserved ;"  for  the  Hebrew  word  rendered  by  us,  "  raised  up," 
never  signifies  to  bring  a  person  or  thing  into  being,  but  to  preserve, 
support,  establish,  or  make  to  stand.  Thus,  also,  the  Jews  had  not 
been  instantly  cut  off;  but  had  been  "endured  with  much  long 
suffering,"  to  give  them  an  opportunity  of  repentance,  of  which 
many  availed  themselves ;  and  the  remainder  were  still  endured, 
though  they  were  filling  up  the  measure  of  their  iniquities,  and 
would,  in  the  end,  but  by  their  own  fault,  display  more  eminently 
the  justice  and  severity  of  God.  Pharaoh's  crowning  offence  was 
his  rebellious  opposition  to  the  designs  of  God  in  taking  Israel  out 
of  Egypt,  and  establishing  them  in  Canaan  as  an  independent  nation, 
and  as  the  church  of  God  ;  the  Jews  filled  up  the  measure  of  their 
iniquities  by  endeavouring  to  withstand  the  purpose  of  God  as  to  the 
Gentiles ;  his  purpose  to  elect  a  church,  composed  of  both  Jews 
and  Gentiles,  only  on  the  ground  of  faith,  and  this  made  the  cases 
parallel.  Therefore,  says  the  apostle,  it  follows  from  all  these  exam- 
ples, that  "  he  hath  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have  mercy,"  gives 
special  religious  advantages  to  those  whom  he  wills  to  elect  for  this 
purpose  ;  "  and  whom  he  will,"  whom  he  chooses  to  select  as 
examples  from  among  notorious  sinners  who  rebelliously  oppose 
his  designs,  "  he  hardeneth,"  or  gives  up  to  a  hardness  which  they 
themselves  have  cherished.  In  verse  19,  the  Jew  is  again  intro- 
duced as  an  objector.  "  Thou  wilt  say  then  unto  me,  Why  doth 
he  yet  find  fault  1  for  who  hadi  resisted  his  will  1"  And  to  this  St. 
Paul  answers,  "  Nay  but,  O  man,  who  art  thou  that  repliest  against 
God  1  Shall  the  thing  formed  say  to  him  that  formed  it,  Why  hast 
thou  made  me  thus  ?'  verse  20.  The  usual  way  in  Avhich  the 
objection  is  explained,  by  non-Calvinistic  commentators,  is  ; — if  the 
continuance  of  the  Jews  in  a  state  of  disobedience  was  the  conse- 
quence of  the  determination  of  God  to  leave  them  to  themselves. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  39 

why  should  God  still  find  fault  1  If  they  had  become  obdurate  by 
the  judicial  withholding  of  his  grace,  why  should  the  Jews  still  be 
blamed,  since  his  will  had  not  been  resisted,  but  accomplished  1  If 
this  be  the  sense  of  the  objection,  then  the  import  of  the  apostle's 
answer  Avill  be,  that  it  is  both  perverse  and  wicked  for  a  nation 
justly  given  up  to  obduracy,  "  to  reply  against  God,"  or  "  debate" 
the  case  with  him ;  and  that  it  ought,  silently  at  least  to  submit  to 
its  penal  dereliction,  recollecting  that  God  has  an  absolute  power 
over  nations,  not  only  to  raise  them  to  peculiar  honours  and  privi- 
leges, and  to  take  them  away,  as  "  the  potter  has  power  over  the 
clay  to  make  one  vessel  to  honour,  and  another  to  dishonour ;"  but 
to  leave  them  to  fill  up  the  measure  of  their  sins,  that  his  judgments 
may  be  the  more  conspicuous.  That  ihis  is  a  better  and  more  con- 
sistent sense  than  that  forced  upon  these  words  by  Calvinistic  com- 
mentators, may  be  freely  admitted  ;  but  it  is  not  wholly  satisfactory. 
For,  1.  One  sees  not  what  can  be  expected  from  a  people  judi- 
cially given  up,  but  a  "  replying  against  God  ;"  or  what  end  is  to  be 
answered  by  taking  any  pains  to  teach  a  people,  in  this  hopeless  case, 
not  "  to  reply  against  God,"  but  to  suffer  his  judgments  in  silence. 

2.  As  little  discoverable,  if  this  be  the  meaning,  is  the  appro- 
priateness of  the  apostle's  allusion  to  the  parable  of  the  potter,  in 
Jeremiah,  chap,  xviii.  There  Almighty  God  declares  his  absolute 
power  over  nations  to  give  them  what  form  and  condition  he  pleases  ; 
but  still  under  these  rules,  that  he  repents  of  the  evil  which  he 
threatens  against  wicked  nations,  when  they  repent,  and  withdraws 
his  blessings  from  them  when  they  are  abused.  But  this  illustra- 
tion is  surely  not  appropriate  to  the  case  of  a  nation  given  up  to 
final  obduracy,  because  the  parable  of  the  potter  supposes  the  time 
of  trial,  as  to  such  nations,  not  yet  passed.  "  O  house  of  Israel, 
cannot  I  do  with  you  as  this  potter?  saith  the  Lord.  Behold,- a? 
the  clay  is  in  the  potter's  hand,  so  are  ye  in  mine  hand,  O  house  of 
Israel.  At  what  instant  I  shall  speak  concerning  a  nation,  and 
concerning  a  kingdom,  to  pluck  up,  and  to  pull  down,  and  to 
destroy  it :  if  that  nation,  against  whom  I  have  pronounced,  turn 
from  their  evil,  I  will  repent  of  the  evil  that  I  thought  to  do  unto 
them.  And  at  what  instant  I  shall  speak  concerning  a  nation  and 
concerning  a  kingdom,  to  build  .and  to  plant  it ;  if  it  do  evil  in  my 
sight,  that  it  obey  not  my  voice,  then  I  will  repent  of  the  good, 
wherewith  I  said  I  would  benefit  them."  There  is  here  no  allusion 
to  nations  being  kept  in  a  state  of  judicial  dereliction  and  obduracy, 
in  order  to  make  their  punishment  more  conspicuous. 

3.  When  the  apostle  speaks  of  the  potter  making  of  the  "  same 
lump,  one  vessel  to  honour  and  another  to  dishonour"  the  last  term 


40  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PAKT 

does  not  fully  apply  to  the  state  of  a  people  devoted  to  inevitable 
destruction.  It  is  true,  that  in  a  following  verse  he  speaks  of 
"  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  to  destruction  ;"  but  that  is  in  another  view 
of  the  case  of  the  Jews,  as  we  shall  immediately  show ;  nor  does 
he  affirm  that  they  were  'fitted  to  destruction"  by  God.  There  he 
speaks  of  what  men  fit  themselves  for  ;  or  that  fitness  for  the  inflic- 
tion of  the  Divine  wrath  upon  them,  which  they  themselves,  by  their 
perverseness,  create.  Here  he  speaks  of  an  act  of  God,  using  the 
figure  of  a  potter  forming  some  vessels  "  to  honour,  others  to  dis- 
honour." But  dishonour  is  not  destruction.  No  potter  makes 
vessels  to  destroy  them  ;  and  we  may  be  certain,  that  when  Jeremiah 
went  down  to  the  potter's  house,  to  see  him  work  the  clay  upon 
"  the  wheel,"  that  the  potter  was  not  employed  in  forming  vessels 
to  destroy  them.  On  the  contrary,  says  the  prophet,  when  the 
lump  of  clay  was  "  marred  in  his  hand ;"  so  that  not  for  want  of 
skill  in  himself,  but  of  proper  quality  in  the  clay,  it  took  not  the 
form  he  designed,  of  the  same  lump  he  made  "  another  vessel,  as  it 
seemed  good  to  the  potter  to  make  it ;" — a  meaner  vessel,  as  the 
inferior  quality  or  temper  of  the  clay  admitted,  instead  of  that  finer 
and  more  ornamental  form  which  it  would  not  take.  The  applica- 
tion of  this  was  natural  and  easy  to  the  house  of  Israel.  It  had 
become  a  lump  of  marred  clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter,  which 
answered  not  to  his  design,  and  yielded  not  to  his  will.  This  illus- 
trated the  case  of  the  Jews,  previous  to  the  captivity  of  Babylon  : 
they  were  marred  in  his  hand,  they  were  not  answering  the  design 
for  which  he  made  them  a  people  ;  but  then  the  potter  gave  the 
stubborn  clay  another,  though  a  baser  form,  and  did  not  cast  it 
away  from  him  :  he  put  the  Jews  into  the  condition  of  slaves  and 
captives  in  a  strange  land,  and  reduced  them  from  their  honourable 
rank  among  the  nations.  This  might  have  been  averted  by  their 
repentance ;  but  when  the  clay  became  utterly  "  marred,"  it  was 
turned  into  this  inferior,  and  less  honourable  form  and  state.  But 
all  this  was  not  excision ;  not  destruction.  The  proceeding  was 
corrective,  as  well  as  punitive  ;  it  brought  them  to  repentance  in 
Babylon  ;  and  God  "  repented  him  of  the  evil."  The  potter  took 
even  that  vessel  which  had  been  made  unto  dishonour  for  seventy 
years,  and  made  of  it  again  "  a  vessel  unto  honour,"  by  restoring 
the  polity  and  church  relation  of  the  Jews. 

4.  The  interpretation  to  which  these  objections  are  made,  also 
supposes  that  the  body  of  the  Jewish  nation,  had  arrived  at  a  state 
of  dereliction  already.  But  this  epistle  was  written  several  years 
before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  although  the  threatening 
had  gone  forth,  as  to  the  dereliction  and  "  hardening;"  of  the  per- 


SECOND,  j  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTE'S.  41 

severingly  impenitent,  it  is  plain,  from  the  labours  oi'  the  apostle 
himself  to  convert  the  Jews  every  where,  and  from  his  "prayers, 
that  Israel  might  be  saved,"  chap,  x,  1  ;  that  he  did  not  conrider 
them,  as  yet  at  least,  in  this  condition ;  though  most  of  them,  and 
especially  those  in  Judea,  were  hastening  to  it. 

Let  us  then  take  a  view  of  this  part  of  the  apostle's  discourse,  in 
some  respects  different.      The  objecting  Jew,  upon  the  apostle 
having  stated  that  God  shows  mercy,  or  special  favour  to  whom  he 
will,  and  selects  out  of  the  mass  of  sinners  whom  he  pleases,  for 
marked  and  eminent  punishment,  says,  "Why  doth  he  yet  find 
fault  ?"  "  Why  does  he,  by  you,  his  messenger,  allowing  you  your 
apostolic  commission,  continue  to  reprove  and  blame  the  Jews  1  for 
who  hath  resisted  his  will  ?"  According  to  your  own  doctrine,  he 
chooses  the  Gentiles,  and  rejects  us ;  his  will  is  accomplished,  not 
resisted  :  "  why  then  doth  he  still  find  fault  V  We  may  grant  that 
the  objection  of  the  Jew  goes  upon  the  Calvinistic  view  of  sove- 
reignty and  predestination,  and  the  shutting  out  of  all  conditions  ; 
but  then  it  is  to  be  remembered,  that  it  is  the  objection  of  a  perverse 
and  unbelieving  Jew ;  and  that  it  is  refuted,  not  conceded,  by  the 
apostle  ;  for  he  proceeds  wholly  to  cut  off  all  ground  and  pretence 
of  "  replying  against  God,"  by  his  reference  to  the  parable  of  the 
potter  in  Jeremiah.    This  reference,  according  to  the  view  we  have 
already  given  of  that  parable,  shows,  1.  That  "  the  vessel"  was  not- 
made  "  unto  dishonour,"  until  the  clay  of  which  it  was  formed,  had 
been  "  marred  in  the  hand  of  the  potter ;"  that  is,  not  until  trial 
being  made,  it  did  not  conform  to  his  design ;  did  not  work  ac- 
cording to  the  pattern  in  his  mind.     This  is  immediately  explained 
by  the  prophet ;  the  nation  did  not  "  repent,"  and  "  turn  from  its 
wickedness,"  and  therefore  God  dealt  with  them  "  as  seemed  good" 
to  him.     Thus,  in  the  time  of  the  apostle,  the  Jewish  nation  was 
the  clay  marred  in  the  hands  of  God.     From  its  stubbornness  and 
want  of  temper,  it  had  not  conformed  to  his  design  of  bringing  it  to 
the  honourable  form  of  a  Christian  church,  in  association  with  the 
Gentiles.     It  was  therefore  made  "  a  vessel  unto  dishonour,"  un- 
churched, and  disowned  of  God,  as  its  forefathers  had  been  in 
Babylon.    This  was  the  dishonoured,  degraded  condition,  of  all  the 
unbelieving  Jews  in  the  apostle's  day,  although  the  destruction  of 
their  city,  and  temple,  and  polity,  had  not  taken  place.    They  were 
rejected  from  being  the  visible  church  of  God  from  the  rending  of 
the  veil  of  the  temple,  or  at  least,  from  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when 
God  visibly  took  possession  of  his  new  spiritual  church,  by  the 
descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost.     But  all  this  was  their  own  P fault ;" 
and  therefore,  notwithstanding  the  objection  of  the  perverse  Jew, 
Vol.  IIT.  fi 


42  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

"  fault"  might  be  found  with  them  who  refused  the  glory  of  a  higher 
church  estate  than  that  which  their  circumcision  formerly  gave ; 
and  which  had  been  so  long  and  so  affectionately  offered  to  them  : 
with  men  Avho,  not  only  would  not  enter  "  the  kingdom  of  God" 
themselves,  but  attempted  to  hinder  even  the  Gentiles  from  entering 
in,  as  far  as  lay  in  their  power. 

2.  The  reference  to  the  parable  of  the  potter  served  to  silence 
their  "  replying  against  God"  also ;  because,  in  the  interpretation 
which  Jeremiah  gives  of  that  parable,  he  represents  even  the  vessel 
formed  unto  dishonour,  out  of  the  mass  which  was  "  marred  in  the 
hand  of  the  potter,"  as  still  within  the  reach  of  the  Divine  favour, 
upon  repentance  ;  and  so  the  conduct  of  God  to  the  Jews,  instead 
of  proceeding  as  the  Jew  in  his  objection  supposes,  upon  rigid 
predestinarian  and  unconditional  grounds,  left  their  state  still  in  their 
own  hands  :  they  had  no  need  to  remain  vessels  of  dishonour,  since 
the  Christian  church  was  still  open  to  them,  with  its  higher  than 
Jewish  honours.  The  word  o[  the  Lord,  by  his  prophet,  immedi- 
ately on  his  having  visited  the  potter's  house,  declares  that  if  a  nation 
"  repent,"  he  will  repent  of  the  evil  designed  against,  or  brought 
upon  it.  The  Jews  in  Babylon,  although  they  were  there  in  the 
form  of  dishonoured  vessels,  did  repent ;  and  of  that  dishonoured 
mass  "  vessels  of  honour"  were  again  made,  at  their  restoration  to 
their  own  land.  Instead  of  replying  against  God,  they  bowed  to 
his  judgments  in  silence  ;  and,  as  we  read  in  the  prayer  of  Daniel, 
confessed  them  just.  Every  Jew  had  this  option  when  the  apostle 
"Wrote,  and  has  it  now ;  and  therefore  St.  Paul  does  not  here  call 
upon  the  Jews,  as  persons  hardened  and  derelict  of  God,  to  be 
silent,  and  own  the  justice  of  God ;  but  as  persons  whose  silent 
submission  would  be  the  first  step  to  their  recovery.  Nor  will  they 
always,  even  as  a  people,  remain  vessels  of  dishonour ;  but  be 
formed  again  on  the  potter's  wheel  as  vessels  of  honour  and  glory, 
of  which  the  return  from  Babylon  was  probably  a  type.  The  object 
of  the  apostle  was,  therefore,  to  silence  a  rebellious  and  perverse 
replying  against  God,  by  producing  a  conviction,  both  of  his  sovereign 
right  to  dispense  his  favours  as  he  pleases,  and  of  his  justice  in 
inflicting  punishments  upon  those  who  set  themselves  against  his 
designs  ;  and  thus  to  bring  the  Jews  to  repentance. 

3.  What  follows  verse  22  serves  farther,  and  by  another  view,  to 
silence  the  objecting  Jew.  It  was  true,  that  the  body  of  the  Jewish 
people  in  Judea,  and  their  polity,  would  be  destroyed :  our  Lord 
had  predicted  it ;  and  the  apostles  frequently,  but  tenderly,  advert 
to  it.  This  prediction  did  not,  however,  prove  that  the  Jews  were, 
at.  the  time  the  apostle  wrote,  generally,  in  a  state  of  entire  and 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  43 

hopeless  dereliction ;  or  the  apostle  would  not  so  earnestly  have 
sought,  and  so  fervently  have  prayed  for  their  salvation.  Nor  did 
that  event  itself  prove,  that  those  who  still  remained,  and  to  this 
day  remain,  were  given  up  entirely  by  God  ;  for  if  so,  why  should 
the  church  have  been,  in  all  ages,  taught  to  look  for  their  restora- 
tion :  no  time  being  fixed,  and  no  signs  established,  to  enable  us  to 
conclude  that  the  dereliction  had  been  taken  off]  The  temporal 
punishment  of  the  Jews  of  Judea  had  no  connexion  with  the  question 
of  their  salvability  as  a  people.  To  this  sad  national  event,  however, 
the  apostle  adverts,  in  the  next  verses.  "  What,"  or  besides,  "  if 
God,  willing  to  show  his  wrath,  and  to  make  his  power  known, 
endured  with  much  long  suffering,  the  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  to 
destruction :  and  that  he  might  make  known  the  riches  of  his  glory, 
on  the  vessels  of  mercy,  which  he  had  before  prepared  to  glory, 
even  us,  whom  he  hath  called,  not  of  the  Jews  only,  but  also  of  the 
Gentiles.  As  he  saith  also  in  Osee,  I  will  call  them  my  people, 
who  were  not  my  people,"  &c,  ver.  22-25.  The  apostle  does  not 
state  his  conclusion,  but  leaves  it  to  be  understood.  He  intended 
it  manifestly,  farther  to  silence  the  perverse  objections  of  the  Jews  ; 
and  he  gives  it  as  a  proof,  not  of  sovereignty  alone,  but  of  sove- 
reignty and  justice  ;  sovereign  mercy  to  the  Gentiles  ;  but  justice 
to  the  Jews  :  as  though  he  had  said,  this  procedure  is  also  righteous, 
and  leaves  no  room  to  reply  against  God. 

The  metaphor  of  "  vessels"  is  still  carried  on  ;  but  by  "  vessels 
of  dishonour,  formed  by  the  potter,"  and  "  vessels  of  wrath,  fitted 
for  destruction,"  he  does  not  mean  vessels  in  the  same  condition  ; 
but  in  different  conditions.  This  is  plain,  from  the  difference  of 
expression  adopted :  "  vessels  unto  dishonour,"  and  "  vessels  of 
wrath ;"  but  as  the  apostle's  reasoning  is  evidently  influenced  by 
the  reference  he  has  made  to  the  parables  of  the  potter,  in  the 
eighteenth  and  nineteenth  chapters  of  Jeremiah,  we  must  again 
refer  to  that  prophecy  for  illustration.  In  all  the  examples  which, 
in  this  discourse,  St.  Paul  takes  out  of  the  Old  Testament,  it  has 
been  justly  observed  by  critics,  that  he  quotes  briefly,  and  only  so 
as  to  give  to  the  Jews,  who  were  well  acquainted  with  their  Scrip- 
tures, the  key  to  the  whole  context  in  which  the  passages  stand  to 
which  he  directs  their  attention.  So  in  the  verses  before  us,  b) 
referring  to  the  potter  forming  the  vessels  on  the  wheel,  he  directs 
them  to  the  whole  section  of  prophecy,  of  which  that  is  the  intro- 
duction. By  examining  this  it  will  be  found,  that  the  prophet,  in 
delivering  his  message,  makes  use  of  the  work  of  the  potter  tor 
illustration,  in  two  states,  and  for  two  purposes.  The  first  we  have 
explained : — the  giving  to  the  mass,  marred  in  the  hands  of  tho 


44  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

potter,  another  form ;  which  expressed  that  dishonoured,  and 
humbled  state,  in  which  the  Jews,  both  for  punishment  and  correc- 
tion, were  placed  under  captivity  in  Babylon.  But  connected  with 
the  humbling  of  this  proud  people,  by  rejecting  them  for  seventy 
years,  as  God's  visible  church,  was  also  the  terrible  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  the  temple  itself.  With  reference  to  this,  the  pro- 
phet, in  the  nineteenth  chapter,  which  is  a  continuation  of  the 
eighteenth,  receives  this  command,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Go  and 
^et  a  potter's  earthen  bottle,  and  take  of  the  ancients  of  the  people, 
and  the  ancients  of  the  priests  ;  and  go  forth  unto  the  valley  of  the 
sons  of  Hinnom,  which  is  by  the  entry  of  the  east  gate,  and  pro- 
claim there  the  words  that  I  shall  tell  thee,  and  say,  Hear  ye  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  O  kings  of  Judah,  and  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  ; 
Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts,  the  God  of  Israel ;  behold,  I  will 
bring  evil  upon  this  place,  the  which  whosoever  heareth,  his  ears 
shall  tingle."  And  then  having  delivered  his  awful  message  in 
various  forms  of  malediction,  he  is  thus  commanded,  in  verse  10, 
"  Then  shalt  thou  break  the  bottle  in  the  sight  of  the  men  that  go 
with  thee,  and  shalt  say  unto  them,  Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts ; 
even  so  will  I  break  this  people  and  this  city,  as  one  breaketh  a  pot- 
ter's vessel,  that  cannot  be  made  whole  again."  As  this  stands  in 
the  same  section  of  prophecy  as  the  parable  of  the  forming  of  ves- 
sels out  of  clay  by  the  potter,  can  it  be  doubted  to  what  the  apostle 
refers  when  he  speaks,  not  only  of  "  vessels  made  unto  dishonour," 
but  also  of  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  for  destruction  ?"  The  potter's 
Earthen  bottle,  broken  by  Jeremiah,  was  "  a  vessel  of  wrath  fitted 
for  destruction,"  though  not  in  the  intention  of  the  potter  who  formed 
it ;  and  the  breaking  or  destruction  of  it,  represented,  as  the  pro- 
phet himself  says,  the  destruction  of  the  city,  temple,  and  polity  of 
the  Jews,  by  the  invasion  of  the  forces  of  the  king  of  Babylon.  The 
coming  destruction  of  the  temple,  city,  and  polity  of  the  Jews  by 
the  Romans  was  thereby  fitly  represented  by  the  same  figure  in 
words,  that  is,  the  destruction  of  an  earthen  vessel  by  violent  frac- 
ture, as  the  former  calamity  had  been  represented  by  it  in  action. 
Farther,  the  circumstances  of  these  two  great  national  punishments 
signally  answer  to  each  other.  In  the  former,  the  Jews  ceased  to 
be  the  visible  church  of  God  for  seventy  years  ;  in  the  latter,  they 
have  been  also  unchurched  for  many  ages.  Their  temporary  rejec- 
tion as  the  visible  church  of  God  when  they  were  taken  into  cap- 
tivity by  Nebuchadnezzar,  was  marked,  also,  by  circumstances  of 
severe  and  terrible  vengeance,  by  invasion,  and  the  destruction  of 
their  political  state.  Their  longer  rejection,  as  God's  church,  was 
also  accompanied  by  judgments  of  the  same  kindL,  and  by  their 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTE:-.  i."> 

more  terrible  excision  and  dispersion,  as  a  body  politic.  As .  the 
prophet  refers  to  both  circumstances,  so,  in  his  usual  manner  of 
teaching  by  action,  he  illustrates  both  by  symbols.  The  first,  by 
the  work  of  the  potter  on  the  wheels  ;  the  second,  by  taking  "  an 
earthen  bottle,  a  vessel  out  of  the  house  of  the  potter,  and  destroy- 
ing- it  before  the  eyes  of  the  ancients  of  the  people  and  the  ancients 
of  the  priests."  The  apostle,  in  like  manner,  refers  to  both  events, 
and  makes  use  of  the  same  symbols  verbally.  The  "  dishonoured" 
state  of  the  Jews,  as  no  longer  acknowledged  by  God  as  his  people, 
since  they  would  not  enter  the  new  church,  the  New  Jerusalem, 
by  faith,  is  shown  by  the  vessel  formed  by  the  potter  unto  "  disho- 
nour ;"  the  collateral  calamities  brought  upon  their  city,  temple, 
and  nation,  arising  out  of  their  enormous  sins,  is  shown  by  allusion  to 
the  prophet's  breaking  another  vessel,  an  earthen  bottle.  This 
temporal  destruction  of  the  Jews  by  the  Roman  invasion,  was  also 
figurative  of  the  future  and  final  punishment  of  all  persevering  un- 
believers. As  to  the  Jews  of  that  day  living  in  Judea,  the  nation  of 
the  Jews,  the  punishment  figured  by  the  broken  vessel,  was  final, 
for  they  were  destroyed  by  the  sword,  and  wasted  by  slavery  ;  and 
as  to  all  who  persevered  in  unbelief,  the  future  punishment  in 
eternity  would  be  final  and  hopeless,  "  as  one  breaketh  a  potter's 
vessel  that  cannot  be  made  xchole  again :"  a  sufficient  proof  that  St. 
Paul  is  not  speaking  of  the  vessel  in  its  state  of  clay,  on  the  potter's 
wheel,  which  might  be  made  whole  again ;  and,  therefore,  the 
punishment  figured  by  that  was  not  final,  but  corrective  ;  for  the 
Jews,  though  made  vessels  unto  dishonour  in  Babylon,  were  again 
made  vessels  of  honour  on  their  restoration ;  and  the  Jews  now, 
though  for  a  much  longer  period  existing  as  "  vessels  of  dishonour," 
shall  be  finally  restored,  brought  into  the  church  of  Christ,  acknow- 
ledged to  be  his  people,  as  the  believing  Gentiles  are,  and  thus, 
united  with  them,  again  be  made  "  vessels  unto  honour." 

The  application  of  the  apostle's  words,  in  the  verses  just  com- 
mented upon,  as  intended  to  silence  the  "  repl)ing"  of  the  Jews 
against  God,  is  now  obvious.  They  could  urge  no  charge  upon 
God  for  making  them  vessels  of  dishonour  by  taking  away  their 
church  state,  for  that  was  their  own  fault ;  they  were  "  marred  in 
his  hands,"  and  they  yielded  not  to  his  design.  But  their  case  was 
no  more  hopeless  than  that  of  the  Jews  in  Babylon ;  they  might 
still  be  again  made  vessels  of  honour.  And  then,  as  to  the  case  of 
the  "vessels  of  wrath  fitted  for  destruction,"  those  stubborn  Jews, 
who  were  bringing  upon  themselves  the  Roman  invasion,  with  the 
destruction  of  their  city  and  nation  ;  and  all  perverse,  unbelieviag 
Jews,  who  continued,  in  other  parts  of  the  world,  to  reject  the  Gos- 


lii  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

pel ;  although  their  approaching  punishment  would  be  final  and 
remediless,  yet  was  there  no  ground  for  them  "to  reply  against 
God"  on  that  account,  as  though  this  dispensation  of  wrath  were 
the  result  of  unconditional  predestination  and  rigid  sovereignty. 
On  the  contrary,  it  was  an  act  of  pure  and  unquestionable  justice, 
which  the  apostle  proves  by  its  being  brought  upon  themselves  by 
their  own  sins  ;  and  by  the  circumstance  that  it  did  not  take  place 
until  after  God  had  "  endured  them  with  much  long  suffering." 

1.  The  destruction  was  brought  upon  themselves  by  their  own 
sins.  This  is  manifest  from  all  the  instances  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, in  which  their  sins  are  charged  upon  them  as  the  cause  of 
their  calamities,  and  which  need  not  be  quoted  ;  and  also  from  the 
expression  in  the  text  before  us,  vessels  "fitted  to  destruction." 
The  word  might  as  well  have  been  rendered  '„'  adapted  to  destruc- 
tion," which  fitness  or  congruity  for  punishment  can  be  produced 
only  by  sin ;  and  this  sin  must  have  been  their  own  choice  and 
fault,  unless  we  should  blasphemously  make  God  the  author  of  sin, 
which  but  a  few  Calvinistic  divines  have  been  bold  enough  to  affirm. 
Nor  are  we  to  overlook  the  change  of  speech  which  the  apostle 
uses (4)  when  speaking  of  "  the  vessels  of  mercy."  Their  "  prepa- 
ration unto  glory"  is  ascribed  expressly  to  God, — "  which  he  had 
afore  prepared  unto  glory ;"  but  of  the  vessels  of  wrath  the  apostle 
simply  says  passively,  "  fitted  to  destruction,"  leaving  the  agent  to 
be  inferred  from  the  nature  of  the  thing,  and  from  the  testimony  of 
Scripture,  which  uniformly  ascribes  the  sins  of  men  to  themselves, 
and  their  punishment  to  their  sins. 

2.  The  justice  of  God's  proceeding  as  to  the  incorrigible  Jews 
is  still  more  strongly  marked  by  the  declaration,  that  these  vessels 
of  wrath  fitted,  or  adapted,  to  destruction,  were  "  endured  with 
much  long  suffering."  To  say  that  their  punishment  was  delayed 
to  render  it  more  conspicuous,  after  they  had  been  left  or  given  up 
by  God,  would  be  no  impeachment  of  God's  justice ;  but  it  is 
much  more  consonant  to  the  tenor  of  Scripture  to  consider  the 
"  long  suffering"  here  mentioned,  as  exercised  previously  to  their 
being  given  up  to  the  hardness  of  their  hearts,  like  Pharaoh,  and 
even  after  they  were,  in  a  rigid  construction  of  just  severity,  "  fitted 
for  destruction  :"  the  punishment  being  delayed  to  afford  them  still 
farther  opportunities  for  repentance.  The  barren  tree,  in  our 
Lord's  parable,  was  the  emblem  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  no  one 
can  deny  that  after  the  Lord  had  come  for  many  years  "  seeking 
fruit  and  finding  none,"  this  fruitless  tree  was  "fitted"  to  be  cut 
down ;  and  yet  it  was  "  endured  with  much  long  suffering."    This 

(4)  Wolfius,  in  loc. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTED.  47 

view  is,  also,  farther  supported  by  the  import  of  the  word  "  long: 
suffering,"  and  its  use  in  the  New  Testament.  Long  suffering  is  a. 
mode  of  mercy,  and  the  reason  of  its  exercise  is  only  to  be  found  in 
a  merciful  intention.  Hence  "  goodness,  and  forbearance,  and  long 
suffering,"  are  united  by  the  apostle,  in  another  part  of  this  epistle, 
when  speaking  of  these  very  Jews,  in  a  passage  which  may  be  con- 
sidered as  strictly  parallel  -with  that  before  us.  "  Or  despisest  thou 
the  riches  of  his  goodness,  and  forbearance,  and  long  suffering ;  not 
knowing  that  the  goodness  of  God  leadeih  thee  to  repentance  ?  But 
after  thy  hardness  and  impenitent  heart  treasurest  up  unto  thyself 
wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath,  and  revelation  of  the  righteous 
judgment  of  God  ;"  which  "  wrath"  the  long  suffering  of  God  was 
exercised  to  prevent,  by  leading  them  "  to  repentance,"  Rom.  ii, 
4,  5.  So  also  St.  Peter  teaches  us,  that  the  end  of  God's  long  suf- 
fering to  men  is  a  merciful  one  :  he  is  "  long  suffering  to  us-ward, 
not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to 
repentance."  The  passage  in  question,  therefore,  cannot  be  under- 
stood of  persons  derelict  and  forsaken  of  God,  as  though  the  long 
suffering  of  God,  in  enduring  them,  were  a  part  of  the  process  of 
"  showing  his  wrath  and  making  his  power  known."  Doddridge, 
a  moderate  Calvinist,  paraphrases  it :  "  What  if  God,  resolving"  at 
last  "  to  manifest  his  wrath,  and  make  his  power  known,  hath,"  in 
the  meantime,  "  endured  with  much  long  suffering"  those  who  shall 
finally  appear  to  be  "  the  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  to  destruction  V  to 
which  there  is  no  objection,  provided  it  be  allowed  that  in  this 
"  meantime"  they  might  have  repented  and  obtained  mercy. 

Thus  the  proceedings  of  God  as  to  the  Jews  shut  out  all  "  reply" 
and  "  debate"  with  God.  Nothing  was  unjust  in  his  conduct  to  the, 
impenitent  among  them,  for  they  were  "  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  for 
destruction,"  wicked  men  justly  liable  to  it,  and  yet,  before  God 
proceeded  to  his  work  of  judgment,  he  endured  them  with  forbear- 
ance, and  gave  them  many  opportunities  of  coming  into  his  church 
on  the  new  election  of  believers  both  of  Jews  and  Gentiles.  And 
as  to  this  election  the  whole  was  a  question  not  of  justice  but  of 
grace,  and  God  had  the  unquestionable  right  of  forming  a  new 
believing  people,  "not  of  the  Jews  only,  but  also  of  the  Gentiles,"  and 
of  filling  them,  as  "  vessels  of  honour,"  with  those  riches,  that  fulness 
of  glory,  as  his  now  acknowledged  church,  for  which  he  had  "  afore 
prepared  them"  by  faith,  the  only  ground  of  their  admission  into 
his  covenant.  The  remainder  of  the  chapter,  on  which  we  have, 
commented,  contains  citations  from  the  prophecies,  with  respect 
to  the  salvation  of  the  "remnant,"  of  the  believing  Jews,  and  the 
calling  of  the  Gentiles.     The  tenth  and  eleventh  chapters,  winch 


48  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

continue  the  discourse,  need  no  particular  examination ;  but  will 
be  found  to  contain  nothing  but  what  most  obviously  refers  to  the 
collective  rejection  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  the  collective  election 
of  the  "  remnant"  of  believing  Jews,  along  with  all  believing  Gen- 
tiles, into  the  visible  church  of  God. 

We  have  now  considered  this  discourse  of  the  apostle  Paul,  with 
reference  to  the  question  of  personal  or  collective  election,  and  find 
that  it  can  be  interpreted  only  of  the  latter.  Let  us  consider  it, 
secondly,  with  reference  to  the  question  of  unconditional  election, 
a  doctrine  which  we  shall  certainly  find  in  it ;  but  in  a  sense  very 
different  from  that  in  which  it  is  held  by  Calvinists. 

By  unconditional  election,  divines  of  this  class  understand  an 
election  of  persons  to  eternal  life  without  respect  to  their  faith  or 
obedience,  these  qualities  in  them  being  supposed  necessarily  to 
follow  as  consequences  of  their  election ;  by  unconditional  repro- 
bation, the  counterpart  of  the  former  doctrine,  is  meant  a  non- 
election  or  rejection  of  certain  persons  from  eternal  salvation ; 
unbelief  and  disobedience  following  this  rejection  as  necessary 
consequences.  Such  kind  of  election  and  rejection  has  no  place 
in  this  chapter,  although  the  subject  of  it  is  the  election  and 
rejection  of  bodies  of  men,  which  is  a  case  more  unfettered  with 
conditions  than  any  other.  We  have,  indeed,  in  it  several  instances 
of  unconditional  election.  Such  was  that  of  the  descendants  of 
Isaac  to  be  God's  visible  church,  in  preference  to  those  of  Ishmael ; 
such  was  that  of  Jacob,  to  the  exclusion  of  Esau  ;  which  election 
was  declared  when  the  children  were  yet  in  the  womb,  before  they 
had  done  "  good  or  evil ;"  so  that  the  blessing  of  the  special  cove- 
nant did  not  descend  upon  the  posterity  of  Jacob,  because  of  any 
righteousness  in  Jacob,  nor  was  it  taken  away  from  the  descendants 
of  Esau,  because  of  any  wickedness  hi  their  progenitor.  In  like 
manner,  when  Almighty  God  determined  no  longer  to  found  his 
visible  church  upon  natural  descent  from  Abraham  in  the  line  of 
Isaac  and  Jacob,  nor  in  any  line  according  to  the  flesh ;  but  to 
make  faith  in  his  Son  Jesus  Christ  the  gate  of  admission  into  this 
privilege,  he  acted  according  to  the  same  sovereign  pleasure.  It  is 
not  impossible  to  conceive  that  he  might  have  carried  on  his  saving 
purposes  among  the  Gentiles  through  Christ,  without  setting  up  a 
visible  church  among  them ;  as,  before  the  coming  of  Christ  he 
carried  on  such  purposes  in  the  Gentile  nations,  (unless  we  suppose 
that  all  but  the  Jews  perished,)  without  collecting  them  into  a  body, 
and  making  himself  their  head  as  his  church,  and  calling  himself 
"their  God"  by  special  covenant,  and  by  visible  and  constant  signs 
acknowledging  them  to  be  "his  people."     Greatly  inferior  would 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  19 

have  been  the  mercy  to  the  Gentile  world  had  this  plan  been 
adopted ;  and,  as  far  as  it  appears  to  us,  the  system  of  Christianity 
would  have  been  much  less  efficient.  We  are,  indeed,  bound  to 
believe  this,  since  Divine  wisdom  and  goodness  have  determined  on 
another  mode  of  procedure  ;  but  still  it  is  conceivable.  On  the 
contrary,  the  purpose  of  God  was  now  not  only  to  continue  a  visible 
church  in  the  world,  but  to  extend  it  in  its  visible,  collective,  and 
organized  form,  into  all  nations.  Yet  this  resolve  rested  on  no 
goodness  in  those  who  were  to  be  subjects  of  it :  both  Jews  and 
Gentiles  were  "  concluded  under  sin,"  and  "  the  whole  world  was 
guilty  before  God."  As  this  plan  is  carried  into  effect  by  extending 
itself  into  different  nations,  we  see  the  same  sovereign  pleasure.  A 
man  of  Macedonia  appears  to  Paul  in  a  vision  by  night,  and  cries, 
*'  Come  over  and  help  us  ;"  but  we  have  no  reason  to  believe  that 
the  Macedonians  were  better  than  other  Gentiles,  although  they 
were  elected  to  the  enjoyment  of  the  privileges  and  advantages  of 
evangelical  ordinances.  So  in  modern  times  parts  of  Hindostan 
have  been  elected  to  receive  the  Gospel,  and  yet  its  inhabitants  pre- 
sented nothing  more  worthy  of  this  election  than  the  people  of 
Tibet,  or  California,  who  have  not  yet  been  elected.  We  call  this 
sovereignty ;  not  indeed  in  the  sense  of  many  Calvinistic  writers, 
who  appear  to  understand  by  the  sovereign  acts  of  God  those  pro- 
cedures which  he  adopts  only  to  show  that  he  has  the  power  to 
execute  them ;  but  because  the  reasons  of  them,  whether  they  are 
reasons  of  judgment,  or  wisdom,  or  mercy,  are  hidden  from  us — 
either  that  we  have  no  immediate  interest  in  them,  or  that  they  are 
too  deep  and  ample  for  our  comprehension,  or  because  it  is  an 
important  lesson  for  men  to  be  taught  to  bow  with  reverent  sub- 
mission to  his  regal  prerogatives.  This  is  the  unconditional  election 
and  non-election  taught, by  the  apostle  in  this  chapter;  but  what 
we  deny  is,  that  either  the  spiritual  blessings  connected  with  reli- 
gious privileges  follow  as  necessary  consequences  from  this  election ; 
or  that  unbelief,  disobedience,  and  eternal  ruin  follow  in  the  same 
manner  from  non-election.  Of  both  these  opinions  the  apostle's 
discourse  itself  furnishes  abundant  refutation. 

Let  us  take  the  instances  of  election.  The  descendants  of  Abra- 
ham in  the  line  of  Isaac  and  Jacob  were  elected  ;  but  true  faith, 
and  obedience,  and  salvation,  did  not  follow  as  infallible  consequents 
of  that  election.  On  the  contrary,  the  "Jew  outwardly,"  and  the 
"  Jew  inwardly,"  were  always  distinguished  in  the  sight  of  God ; 
and  the  children  of  Abraham's  faith,  not  the  children  of  Abraham's 
body,  were  the  true  "  Israel  of  God."  Again,  the  Gentiles  were 
at  length  elected  to  be  the  visible  church  of  God  ;  but  obedience 

Vol.  III.  7 


50  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  salvation  did  not  follow  as  necessary  consequents  of  this  election, 
On  the  contrary,  many  Gentiles  chosen  to  special  religious  privi- 
leges have,  in  all  ages,  neglected  the  great  salvation,  and  have 
perished,  though  professing  the  name  of  Christ ;  and  in  that  pure 
age  in  which  St.  Paul  wrote,  when  comparatively  few  Gentiles 
entered  the  church  but  with  a  sincere  faith  in  Christ,  he  warns  all 
of  the  danger  of  excision  for  unbelief  and  disobedience  : — "  Thou 
standest  by  faith ;  be  not  high  minded,  but  fear."  "  For  if  God 
spared  not  the  natural  branches,  take  heed  lest  he  also  spare  not 
thee." — "  Toward  thee  goodness,  if  thou  continue  in  his  goodness  ; 
otherwise  thou  also  shalt  be  cut  off."  Certain,  therefore,  it  is,  that 
although  this  collective  election  of  bodies  of  men  to  religious  privi- 
leges, and  to  become  the  visible  church  of  God,  be  unconditional, 
the  salvation  to  which  these  privileges  were  designed  to  lead,  de- 
pends upon  personal  faith  and  obedience. 

Let  us  turn,  then,  to  the  instances  of  non-election  or  rejection ; 
and  here  it  will  be  found  that  unbelief,  disobedience,  and  punish- 
ment, do  not  follow  as  infallible  consequents  of  this  dispensation. 
Abraham  was  greatly  interested  for  Ishmael,  and  obtained,  in 
answer  to  his  prayer,  at  least  temporal  promises  in  his  behalf,  and 
in  that  of  his  posterity  ;  and  there  is  no  reason  to  conclude  from 
any  thing  which  occurs  in  the  sacred  writers,  that  his  Arabian 
descendants  were  shut  out,  except  by  their  own  choice  and  fault, 
at  any  time,  from  the  hopes  of  salvation  ;  at  least  previous  to  their 
embracing  the  imposture  of  Mohammed  :  for  if  so,  we  must  give  up 
Job  and  his  friends  as  reprobates.  The  knowledge  of  the  true  God 
existed  long  in  Arabia  ;  and  "  Arabians"  were  among  the  fruits  of 
primitive  Christianity,  as  we  learn  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

Nor  have  we  any  ground  to  conclude  that  the  Edomites,  as  such, 
were  excluded  from  the  mercies  of  God,  because  of  their  non- 
election  as  his  visible  church.  Their  proximity  to  the  Jewish  nation 
must  have  served  to  preserve  among  them  a  considerable  degree 
of  religious  knowledge  ;  and  their  continuance  as  a  people  for  many 
ages,  may  argue  at  least  no  great  enormity  of  wickedness  among 
them  :  which  is  confirmed  by  the  reasons  given  for  their  ultimate 
destruction.  The  final  malediction  against  this  people  is  uttered 
by  the  prophet  Malachi.  "  Whereas  Edom  saith,  We  are  impover- 
ished, but  we  will  return  and  build  the  desolate  places ;  thus  saith 
the  Lord  of  Hosts,  They  shall  build,  but  I  will  throw  down ;  and 
they  shall  call  them,  the  border  of  wickedness,  and,  the  people 
against  whom  the  Lord  hath  indignation  for  ever,"  i,  4.  Thus  their 
destruction  was  the  result  of  their  "  wickedness"  in  the  later  periods 
of  their  history  ;  nor  have  we  any  reason  to  conclude  that  this  was 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  51 

more  inevitable  than  that  of  other  ancient  nations,  whom  God,  as 
in  the  case  of  Assyria,  called  to  repentance  ;  but  who,  not  regard- 
ing the  call,  were  finally  destroyed.  That  the  Edomites  were  not, 
in  more  ancient  times,  the  objects  of  the  Divine  displeasure,  is 
manifest  from  Deut.  ii,  5,  where  it  is  recorded  that  God  commanded 
the  Israelites,  "  Meddle  not  with  them  ;  for  I  will  not  give  you  of 
their  land,  no,  not  so  much  as  a  foot  breadth ;  because  I  have 
given  Mount  Seir  unto  Esau  for  a  possession."  They  also  outlived, 
as  a  people,  the  ten  tribes  of  Israel ;  they  continued  to  exist  when 
the  two  tribes  were  carried  into  captivity  to  Babylon ;  and  about 
the  year  of  the  world  3875,  or  129  before  the  Christian  era,  John 
Hircanus  entirely  subdued  them,  and  obliged  them  to  incorporate 
with  the  Jewish  nation  and  to  receive  religion.  They  professed 
consequently  the  same  faith,  and  were  thus  connected  with  the 
visible  church  of  God.  (5) 

We  come,  finally,  to  the  case  of  the  rejected  Jews  in  the  very 
■age  of  the  apostles.  The  purpose  of  God,  as  we  have  seen,  was  to 
abolish  the  former  ground  on  which  his  visible  church  had  for  so 
many  ages  been  built,  that  of  natural  descent  from  Abraham  by 
Isaac  and  Jacob  ;  but  this  was  so  far  from  shutting  out  the  Jews 
from  spiritual  blessings,  that  though,  as  Jews,  they  were  now  denied 
to  be  God's  church,  yet  they  were  all  invited  to  come  in  with  the 
Gentiles,  or  rather  to  lead  the  way  into  the  new  church  established 
on  the  new  principle  of  faith  in  Jesus,  as  the  Christ.  Hence  the 
apostles  were  commanded  to  "  begin  at  Jerusalem"  to  preach  the 
Gospel ;  hence  they  made  the  Jews  the  first  offer  in  every  place  in 
Asia  Minor,  and  other  parts  of  the  Roman  empire,  into  which  they 
travelled  on  the  same  blessed  errand.  Many  of  the  Jews  accepted 
the  call,  entered  into  the  church  state  on  the  new  principle  on 
which  the  church  of  Christ  was  now  to  be  elected,  and  hence  they 
are  called,  by  St.  Paul,  "  the  remnant  according  to  the  election  of 
grace,"  Rom.  xi,  5,  and  " the  election'''  The  rest,  it  is  true,  are 
said  to  have  been  "  blinded ;"  just  in  the  same  sense  as  Pharaoh 
was  hardened.  He  hardened  his  own  heart,  and  was  judicially  left 
to  his  obduracy ;  they  blinded  themselves  by  their  prejudices  and 
worldliness  and  spiritual  pride,  and  were  at  length  judicially  given 
up  to  blindness.  But  then  might  they  not  all  have  had  a  share  in 
this  new  election  into  this  new  church  of  God  ?  Truly  every  one  of 
them ;  for  thus  the  apostle  argues,  Rom.  ix,  30-32,  "  What  shall 

(5)  "  Having  conquered  the  Edomites,  or  Idumeans,"  says  Prideaux,  "  he  re* 
duced  them  to  this  necessity,  either  to  embrace  the  Jewish  religion,  or  elso  to  leave 
the  country,  and  seek  new  dwellings  elsewhere  ;  whereon,  choosing  rather  to- 
leave  their  idolatry  than  their  country,  they  all  became  proselytes  to  the  Jewish 
r<>Ii<rion,"  &rc. — Onnex..  vol.  iii,  pj>.  30>.r>.  36& 


53  IDEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

we  say  then  ?  That  the  Gentiles,  which  followed  not  after  righteous- 
ness, have  attained  to  righteousness,  even  the  righteousness  which 
is  of  faith  ;  but  Israel,  which  followed  after  the  law  of  righteousness, 
hath  not  attained  to  the  law  of  righteousness.  Wherefore  ?  Be- 
cause they  sought  it  not  by  faith,  but,  as  it  were,  by  the 
works  of  the  law."  And  thus  we  have  it  plainly  declared  that  they 
were  excluded  from  the  new  spiritual  church  of  God,  not  by  any 
act  of  sovereignty,  not  by  any  decree  of  reprobation,  but  by  an  act 
of  their  own :  they  rejected  the  doctrine  and  way  of  faith ;  they 
attained  not  unto  righteousness,  because  they  sought  it  not  by  faith. 

The  collective  election  and  rejection  taught  in  this  chapter  is  not 
then  unconditional,  in  the  sense  of  the  Calvinists  ;  and  neither  the 
salvation  of  the  people  elected,  nor  the  condemnation  of  the  peo- 
ple rejected,  flows  as  necessary  consequents  from  these  acts  of  the 
Divine  sovereignty.  They  are,  indeed,  mysterious  procedures ; 
for  doubtless  it  must  be  allowed  that  they  place  some  portions  of 
men  in  circumstances  more  favoured  than  others  ;  but  even  in  such 
cases  God  has  shut  out  the  charge  of  "  unrighteousness"  by  requir- 
ing from  men  according  "  to  what  they  have,  and  not  according  to 
what  they  have  not,"  as  we  learn  from  many  parts  of  Scripture 
wliich  reveal  the  principles  of  the  Divine  administration,  both  as  to 
this  life  and  another ;  for  no  man  is  shut  out  from  the  mercy  of  God, 
but  by  his  own  fault.  He  has  connected  these  events  also  with 
wise  and  gracious  general  plans,  as  to  the  human  race.  They  are 
not  acts  of  arbitrary  will,  or  of  caprice  ;  they  are  acts  of  "  wisdom 
and  knowledge,"  the  mysterious  bearings  of  which  are  to  be  in 
future  times  developed.  "  O  the  depth,  both  of  the  wisdom  and 
knowledge  of  God  !  how  unsearchable  are  his  judgments,  and  his 
ways  past  finding  out !"  These  are  the  devout  expressions  with 
which  St.  Paul  concludes  this  discourse  ;  but  they  would  ill  apply 
to  the  sovereign,  arbitrary,  and  unconditional  reprobation  of  men 
from  God's  mercies  in  time  and  eternity,  on  the  principle  of  taking 
some  and  leaving  others  without  any  reason  in  themselves.  There 
is  no  plan  in  this  ;  no  wisdom ;  no  mystery  ;  and  it  is  capable  of  no 
farther  development  for  the  instruction  and  benefit  of  the  world ; 
for  that  which  rests  originally  on  no  reason  but  solely  on  arbitrary 
will,  is  incapable,  from  its  very  nature,  of  becoming  the  component 
part  of  a  deeply  laid,  and,  for  a  time,  mysterious  plan,  which  is  to 
be  brightened  into  manifest  wisdom,  and  to  terminate  in  the  good 
of  mankind,  and  the  glory  of  God. 

The  only  argument  of  any  weight  which  is  urged  to  prove,  that 
in  the  election  spoken  of  in  this  discourse  of  St.  Paul,  individuals 
are  intended,  is,  that  though  it  should  be  allowed  that  the  apostle  is 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  O.i 

speaking  of  the  election  of  bodies  of  men  to  be  the  visible  church 
of  God  ;  yet,  as  none  are  acknowledged  by  him  to  be  his  true 
church,  except  true  believers ;  therefore,  the  election  of  men  to 
faith  and  eternal  life,  as  individuals,  must  necessarily  be  included ; 
or  rather,  is  the  main  thing  spoken  of.  For  as  the  spiritual  seed  of 
Abraham  were  the  only  persons  allowed  to  be  "  tYu  Israel  of  God" 
under  the  Old  Testament  dispensation  ;  and  as,  upon  the  rejection 
of  the  Jews,  true  believers  only,  both  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  were 
allowed  to  constitute  the  church  of  Christ,  the  spiritual  seed  of 
Abraham,  under  the  law ;  and  genuine  Christians,  both  of  Jews 
and  Gentiles,  under  the  Gospel,  are  "  the  election ;"  and  "  the  rem- 
nant according  to  the  election  of  grace,"  mentioned  by  the  apostle. 

In  this  argument  truth  is  greatly  mixed  up  with  error,  which  a 
f^ew  observations  will  disentangle. 

1.  It  is  a  mere  assumption,  that  the  spiritual  Israelites,  under  the 
law,  in  opposition  to  the  Israelites  by  birth,  are  any  where  called 
"  the  election ;"  and  "  the  remnant  according  to  the  election  of 
grace ;"  or  even  alluded  to  under  these  titles.  The  first  phrase 
occurs  in  Rom.  xi,  7,  "  What  then  ?  Israel  hath  not  obtained  that 
Avhich  he  seeketh  for ;  but  the  election  hath  obtained  it,  and  the  rest 
were  blinded."  Here  it  is  evident  that  "  the  election"  means  the 
Jews  of  that  day,  who  believed  in  Christ,  in  opposition  to  "  the  rest," 
who  believed  not ;  in  other  words,  "  the  election"  was  that  part  of 
the  Jews,  who  had  been  chosen  into  the  Christian  church,  by  faith. 
The  second  phrase  occurs  in  ver.  5,  of  the  same  chapter,  "  Even 
so,  then,  at  this  present  time,  also,  there  is  a  remnant  according  to 
the  election  of  grace  ;"  where  the  same  class  of  persons,  the  believ- 
ing Jews,  who  submitted  to  the  plan  of  election  into  the  church  by 
"  grace,"  through  faith,  are  the  only  persons  spoken  of.  Nor  are 
these  terms  used  to  designate  the  believing  Gentiles  ;  they  belong 
exclusively  to  the  Christianized  portion  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  as 
the  contrary  assumption  is  without  any  foundation,  the  inferences 
drawn  from  it  are  imaginary. 

2.  It  is  true  that,  under  the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  the 
spiritual  seed  of  Abraham,  were  the  only  part  of  the  Israelites  who 
were,  with  reference  to  their  spiritual  and  eternal  state,  accepted 
of  God  ;  but  it  is  not  true,  that  the  election  of  which  the  apostle 
speaks,  was  confined  to  them.  With  reference  to  Esau  and  Jacob, 
the  apostle  says,  Rom.  ix,  11,  13,  "For  the  children  being  not  yet 
born,  neither  having  done  good  or  evil,  that  the  purpose  of  God, 
according  to  election,  might  stand,  not  of  works,  but  of  him  that 
calleth  ;  it  was  said  unto  her,  the  elder  shall  serve  the  younger ;  as 
it  is  written,  Jacob  have  I  loved,  but  Esau  have  I  hated."     The 


54  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

"  election"  here  spoken  of,  or  God's  purpose  to  elect,  relates  to 
Jacob  being  chosen  in  preference  to  Esau ;  which  election,  as  we 
have  seen,  respected  the  descendants  of  Jacob.  Now,  if  this  meant 
the  election  of  the  pious  descendants  of  Jacob  only,  and  not  his 
natural  descendants ;  then  the  opposition  between  the  election  of 
the  progeny  of  Jacob,  and  the  non-election  of  the  progeny  of  Esau, 
is  destroyed  ;  and  there  was  no  reason  to  say  "  Jacob  have  I  loved, 
but  Esau  have  I  hated,"  or  loved  less ;  but  the  pious  descendants 
of  Jacob  have  I  loved  and  elected ;  and  the  rest  I  have  not  loved, 
and  therefore  have  not  elected.  Some  of  the  Calvinistic  comment- 
ators have  felt  this  difficulty,  and  therefore  say,  that  these  cases 
are  not  given  as  examples  of  the  election  and  reprobation  of  which 
the  apostle  speaks  ;  but  as  illustrations  of  it.  If  considered  as 
illustrations,  they  must  be  felt  to  be  of  a  very  perplexing  kind  ;  for 
how  the  preference  of  one  nation  to  another,  when,  as  we  have  seen, 
this  did  not  infallibly  secure  the  salvation  of  the  more  favoured 
nation,  nor  the  eternal  destruction  of  the  less  favoured,  can  illus- 
trate the  election  of  individuals  to  eternal  life,  and  the  reprobation 
of  other  individuals  to  eternal  death,  is  difficult  to  conceive.  But 
they  are  manifestly  examples  of  that  one  election,  of  which  the  apostle 
speaks  throughout ;  and  not  illustrations  of  one  kind  of  election  by 
another.  They  are  the  instances  which  he  gives  in  proof  that  the 
election  of  the  believing  Jews  of  his  day  to  be,  along  with  the  believ- 
ing Gentiles,  the  visible  church  of  God,  and  the  rejection  of  the 
Jews  after  the  flesh,  was  not  contrary  to  the  promises  of  God  made 
to  Abraham  ;  because  God  had,  in  former  times,  made  distinctions 
between  the  natural  descendants  of  Abraham  as  to  church  privi- 
leges, without  any  impeachment  of  his  faithfulness  to  his  word. 
Again,  if  the  election  of  which  the  apostle  speaks  were  that  of  pious 
Jews  in  all  ages,  so  that  they  alone  stood  in  a  church  relation  to 
God,  and  were  thus  the  only  Jews  in  covenant  with  him ;  how 
could  he  speak  of  the  rejection  of  the  other  portion  of  the  Jews  1  Of 
their  being  cut  off?  Of  the  covenants  "  pertaining"  to  them  1  They 
could  not  be  rejected,  who  were  never  received  ;  nor  cut  off,  who 
were  never  branches  in  the  stock  ;  nor  have  covenants  pertaining 
to  them,  if  in  these  covenants  they  had  never  been  included. 

3.  This  notion,  that  the  ancient  election  of  a  part  of  the  descend- 
ants of  Abraham  spoken  of  by  the  apostle  was  of  the  pious  Jews 
only,  and,  therefore,  a  personal  election,  is,  in  part,  grounded  by 
these  commentators  upon  a  mistaken  view  of  the  meaning  of  the 
sixth,  seventh,  eighth,  and  ninth  verses  of  this  chapter ;  in  which 
they  have  been  sometimes  incautiously  followed  by  those  of  very 
different  sentiments,  and  who  have  thus  somewhat  entangled  them- 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  55 

selves.  "  Not  as  though  the  word  of  God  hath  taken  none  effect 
For  they  are  not  all  Israel,  which  are  of  Israel :  neither,  because 
they  are  the  seed  of  Abraham,  are  they  all  children :  but,  In  Isaac 
shall  thy  seed  be  called.  That  is,  They  which  are  the  children  of 
the  flesh,  these  are  not  the  children  of  God :  but  the  children  of  the 
promise  are  counted  for  the  seed.  For  this  is  the  word  of  promise, 
At  this  time  will  I  come,  and  Sarah  shall  have  a  son."  In  this 
passage,  the  interpreters  in  question  suppose  that  St.  Paul  distin- 
guishes between  the  spiritual  Israelites,  and  those  of  natural  descent; 
between  the  spiritual  seed  of  Abraham,  and  his  seed  according  to 
the  flesh.  Yet  the  passage  not  only  affords  no  evidence  that  this 
was  his  intention ;  but  implies  just  the  contrary.  Our  view  of  its 
meaning  is  given  above  ;  but  it  may  be  necessary  to  support  it  more 
fully. 

Let  it  then  be  recollected  that  the  apostle  is  speaking  of  that 
great  event,  the  rejection  of  the  Jews  from  being  any  longer  the 
visible  church  of  God,  on  account  of  natural  descent ;  and  that  in 
this  passage  he  shows  that  the  purpose  of  God  to  construct  his 
church  upon  a  new  basis,  that  of  faith  in  Christ,  although  it  would 
exclude  the  body  of  the  Jewish  people  from  this  church,  since  they 
refused  "  the  election  of  grace"  through  faith,  would  not  prove  that 
"  the  word  of  God  had  fallen"  to  the  ground,  or  as  the  literal  mean- 
ing of  the  original  is  rendered  in  our  version,  "has  taken  none 
effect."  The  word  of  God  referred  to  can  only  be  God's  original 
promise  to  Abraham,  to  be  "  a  God  to  him  and  to  his  seed  after 
him ;"  which  was  often  repeated  to  the  Jews  in  after  ages,  in  the 
covenant  engagement,  "  I  will  be  to  you  a  God,  and  ye  shall  be  to 
me  a  people  ;"  a  mode  of  expression  which  signifies,  in  all  the 
connexions  in  which  it  stands,  an  engagement  to  acknowledge  them 
as  his  visible  church  :  he  being  publicly  acknowledged  on  their  part 
as  "  their  God,"  or  object  of  worship  and  trust ;  and  they,  on  the 
other,  being  acknowledged  by  him  as  his  peculiar  "  people."  This, 
therefore,  we  are  to  take  to  be  the  sense  of  the  promise  to  Abraham 
and  to  his  seed.  How  then  does  the  apostle  prove  that  the  "  word 
of  God  had  not  fallen  to  the  ground,"  although  the  natural  seed  of 
Abraham,  the  Jews  of  that  day,  had  been  rejected  as  his  church  1 
He  proves  it  by  showing  that  all  the  children  of  Abraham  by  natural 
descent  had  not,  in  the  original  intention  of  the  promise,  been 
"  counted,"  or  reckoned,  as  "  the  seed"  to  which  these  promises 
had  been  made  ;  and  this  he  establishes  by  referring  to  those  acts 
of  God  by  which  he  had,  in  his  sovereign  pleasure,  conferred  the 
church  relation  upon  the  descendants  of  Abraham  only  in  certaiD 
lines,  as  in  those  of  Isaac  and  Jacob,  and  excluded  the  others.    In 


56 


THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 


this  view^the  argument  is  cogent  to  his  purpose.     By  the  exercise 
of  the  same  sovereignty  God  had  now  resolved  not  to  connect  the 
church  relation  with  natural  descent,  even  in  the  line  of  Isaac  and 
Jacob ;  but  to  establish  it  on  a  ground  which  might  comprehend 
the  Gentile  nations  also,  the  common  ground  of  faith  in  Christ.  The 
mere  children  of  the  flesh  were,  therefore,  in  this  instance  excluded  ; 
and  "  the  children  of  the  promise,"  the  promise  now  made  to  be- 
lieving Jews  and  Gentiles,  those  begotten  by  the  word  of  the  Gospel, 
were  "  counted  for  the  seed."     But  though  it  is  a  great  truth,  that 
only  the  children  of  the  Gospel  promise  are  now  "  counted  for  the 
seed ;"  it  does  not  follow  that  the  children  of  the  promise  made  to 
Sarah  were  all  spiritual  persons  ;  and,  as  such,  the  only  subjects  of 
that  church  relation  which  was  connected  with  that  circumstance. 
That  the  Gentiles  who  believed  upon  the  publication  of  the  Gospel 
were  always  contemplated  as  a  part  of  that  seed  to  which  the  pro- 
mises were  made,  the  apostle  shows  in  a  former  part  of  the  same 
epistle  ;  but  that  "  mystery"  was  not  in  early  times  revealed.    God 
had  not  then  formed,  nor  did  he  till  the  apostle's  age  form  his  visible 
church  solely  on  the  principle  of  faith,  and  a  moral  relation.    This 
is  the  character  of  the  new,  not  of  the  old  dispensation  ;  and  the 
different  grounds  of  the  church  relation  were  suited  to  the  design 
of  each.     One  was  to  preserve  truth  from  extinction  ;  the  other  to 
extend  it  into  all  nations :  in  one,  therefore,  a  single  people,  taken 
as  a  nation  into  political  as  well  as  religious  relations  with  God, 
was  made  the  deposite  of  the  truth  to  be  preserved  ;  in  the  other,  a 
national  distinction,  and  lines  of  natural  descent,  could  not  be  re- 
cognised, because  the  object  was  to  call  all  nations  to  the  obedience 
of  the  same  faith,  and  to  place  all  on  an  equality  before  God.     As 
the  very  ground  of  the  church  relation,  then,  under  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, was  natural  descent  from  Abraham  ;  and  as  it  was  mixed  up 
and  even  identified  with  a  political  relation  also,  the  ancient  election 
of  which  the  apostle  speaks,  could  not  be  confined  to  spiritual  Jews  : 
and  even  if  it  could  be  proved,  that  the  church  of  God,  under  the 
new  dispensation,  is  to  be  confined  to  true  believers  only,  yet  that 
would  not  prove  that  the  ancient  church  of  God  had  that  basis  alone, 
since  we  know  it  had  another,  and  a  more  general  one.     When, 
therefore,  the  apostle  says,  "  for  they  are  not  all  Israel,  which  are 
of  Israel,"  the  distinction  is  not  between  the  spiritual  and  the  natural 
Israelites  ;  but  between  that  part  of  the  Israelites  who  continued  to 
enjoy  church  privileges,  and  those  who  were  "  of  Israel,"  or  de- 
scendants of  Jacob,  surnamed  Israel,  as  the  ten  tribes  and  parts  of 
the  two,  who,  being  dispersed  among  the  heathen,  for  their  sins, 
^rere  no  longer  a  part  of  God's  visible  church.     This  is  the  first 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  5* 

instance  which  the  apostle  gives  of  the  rejection  of  a  part  of  the 
natural  seed  of  Abraham  from  the  promise.  He  strengthens  the 
argument  by  going  up  higher,  even  to  those  who  had  immediately 
been  born  to  Abraham,  the  very  children  of  his  body,  Ishmael  and 
Isaac.  "  The  children  of  the  flesh ;"  that  is,  Ishmael  and  his  de- 
scendants, (so  called,  because  he  was  born  naturally,  not  superna- 
turally,  as  Isaac  was,  according  to  "  the  promise"  made  to  Abraham 
and  Sarah  ;) — they,  says  the  apostle,  are  not  the  "children  of  God;" 
that  is,  as  the  context  still  shows,  not  "the  seed"  to  whom  the 
promise  that  he  would  be  "  a  God  to  Abraham  and  his  seed"  was 
made :  "  but  the  children  of  the  promise,"  that  is,  Isaac  and  his 
descendants,  were  "  counted  for  the  seed."  And  that  we  might 
not  mistake  this,  "  the  promise"  referred  to  is  added  by  the  apostle  ; 
— "  for  this  is  the  word  of  the  promise,  At  this  time  will  I  come, 
and  Sarah  shall  have  a  son."  Of  this  promise,  the  Israelites  by 
natural  descent,  were  as  much  "  the  children,"  as  the  spiritual 
Israelites  ;  and,  therefore,  to  confine  it  to  the  latter  is  wholly  gra- 
tuitous, and  contrary  to  the  words  of  the  apostle.  It  is  indeed  an 
interesting  truth,  that  a  deep  and  spiritual  mystery  ran  through  that 
part  of  the  history  of  Abraham  here  referred  to,  which  the  apostle 
opens  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  :  "  The  children  of  the  bond 
woman  and  her  son,"  symbolized  the  Jews  who  sought  justification 
by  the  law ;  and  "  the  children  of  the  promise,"  "  the  children  of 
the  free  woman,"  those  who  were  justified  by  faith,  and  born 
supernaturally,  that  is  "born  again,"  and  made  heirs  of  the  heavenly 
inheritance.  But  these  things,  says  St.  Paul,  are  an  "  allegory  ;" 
and  therefore  could  not  be  the  thing  allegorized,  any  more  than  a 
type  can  be  the  thing  typified  ;  for  a  type  is  always  of  an  inferior 
nature  to  the  antitype,  and  is  indeed  something  earthly,  adumbrating 
that  which  is  spiritual  and  heavenly.  It  follows,  therefore,  that 
although  the  choosing  of  Isaac  and  his  descendants,  prefigured  the 
choosing  of  true  believers,  (persons  born  supernaturally  under  the 
Gospel  dispensation,)  to  be  "the  children  of  God  ;"  and  that  the 
rejection  of  the  "  children  of  the  flesh"  typified  the  rejection  of  the 
unbelieving  Jews  from  God's  church,  because  they  had  nothing  but 
natural  descent  to  plead :  nay,  though  we  allow  that  these  events 
might  be  allegorical,  on  one  part,  of  the  truly  believing  Israelites, 
in  all  ages  ;  and  on  the  other,  of  those  who  were  Jews  only  "  out- 
\vardly,"  and  therefore,  as  to  the  heavenly  inheritance,  were  not 
"  heirs ;"  yet  still  that  which  typified,  and  represented  in  allegory 
these  spiritual  mysteries,  was  not  the  spiritual  mystery  itself.  It 
was  a  comparatively  gross  and  earthly  representation  of  it ;  and  the 
passage  is,  therefore,  to  be  understood  of  the  election  of  the  natural 
Vol.  Ill  R 


08  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

descendants  of  Isaac,  as  the  children  of  the  promise  made  to  Sarah, 
to  be  "  the  seed"  to  which  the  promises  of  church  privileges  and  a 
church  relation  were  intended  to  be  in  force,  though  still  subject 
to  the  election  of  the  line  of  Jacob  in  preference  to  that  of  Esau ; 
and  subject  again,  at  a  still  greater  distance  of  time,  to  the  election 
of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  to  continue  God's  visible  church,  till  the 
coming  of  Messiah,  whilst  the  ten  tribes,  who  were  equally  "  of 
Israel,"  were  rejected. 

4.  That  this  election  of  bodies  of  men  to  be  the  visible  church  of 
God,  involved  the  election  of  individuals  into  the  true  church  of 
God,  and  consequently  their  election  to  eternal  life,  is  readily  ac- 
knowledged ;  but  this  weakens  not  in  the  least  the  arguments  by 
which  we  have  shown  that  the  apostle,  in  this  chapter,  speaks  of 
collective,  and  not  of  individual  election  :  on  the  contrary,  it  esta- 
blishes them.  Let  us,  to  illustrate  this,  first  take  the  case  of  the 
ancient  Jewish  church. 

The  end  of  God's  election  of  bodies  of  men  to  peculiar  religious 
advantages  is,  doubtless  as  to  the  individuals  of  which  these  bodies 
are  composed,  their  recovery  from  sin,  and  their  eternal  salvation. 
Hence,  to  all  such  individuals,  superior  means  of  instruction,  and 
more  efficient  means  of  salvation  are  afforded  along  with  a  deeper 
responsibility.  The  election  of  an  individual  into  the  true  church 
by  writing  his  name  in  heaven,  is  however,  an  effect  dependant  upon 
the  election  of  the  body  to  which  he  belongs.  It  follows  only  from 
his  personal  repentance,  and  justifying  faith  ;  or  else  we  must  say, 
that  men  are  members  of  the  true  spiritual  church,  before  they 
repent  and  have  justifying  faith,  for  which,  assuredly,  we  have  no 
warrant  in  Scripture.  Individual  election  is  then  another  act  of 
God,  subsequent  to  the  former.  The  former  is  sovereign  and  un- 
conditional ;  the  latter  rests  upon  revealed  reasons  ;  and  is  not,  as 
we  shall  just  now  more  fully  show,  unconditional.  These  two  kinds 
of  election,  therefore,  are  not  to  be  confounded ;  and  it  is  absurd 
to  argue  that  collective  election  has  no  existence,  because  there  is 
an  individual  election  ;  since  the  latter,  on  the  contrary,  necessarily 
supposes  the  former.  The  Jews,  as  a  body,  had  their  visible  church 
state,  and  outward  privileges,  although  the  pious  Jews  alone  availed 
themselves  of  them  to  their  own  personal  salvation.  As  to  the 
Christian  church,  there  is  a  great  difference  in  its  circumstances ; 
but  the  principle,  though  modified,  is  still  there. 

The  basis  of  this  church  was  to  be,  not  natural  descent  from  a 
common  head  ;  marking  out,  as  that  church,  some  distinct  family, 
tribe,  and,  as  it  increased  in  numbers,  some  one  nation,  invested 
too,  as  a  nation  must  be,  with  a  political  character  and  state  :  but 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  59 

iaith  in  Christ.  Yet  even  this  faith  supposes  a  previous  sovereign 
and  unconditional  collective  election.  For,  as  the  apostle  argues, 
"  faith  cometh  by  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word  of  God  :  but 
how  shall  they  hear  without  a  preacher  1  and  how  shall  they  preach 
except  they  be  sent  V1  Now  this  sending  to  one  Gentile  nation  be- 
fore another  Gentile  nation,  a  distinction  which  continues  to  be 
made  in  the  administration  of  the  Divine  Government  to  this  day, 
is  that  sovereign  unconditional  election  of  the  people  constituting 
that  nation,  to  the  means  of  becoming  God's  church  by  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Gospel,  through  the  men  "sent"  to  them  for  this  purpose. 
The  persons  who  first  believed,  were  for  the  most  part  real  Chris- 
tians, in  the  sense  of  being  truly,  and  in  heart  turned  to  God. 
They  could  not  generally  go  so  far  as  to  be  baptized  into  the  name 
of  Christ,  in  the  face  of  persecution,  and  in  opposition  to  their  own 
former  prejudices,  without  a  considerable  previous  ripeness  of  expe- 
rience, and  decision  of  character.  Under  the  character  of  "  saints" 
in  the  highest  sense,  the  primitive  churches  are  addressed  in  the 
apostolical  epistles  :  and  such  we  are  bound  to  conclude  they  were ; 
or  they  would  not  have  been  so  called  by  men  who  had  the  "  dis- 
cernment of  spirits."  Whatever  then  the  number  was,  whether 
small  or  great,  who  first  received  the  word  of  the  Gospel  in  every 
place,  they  openly  confessed  Christ,  assembled  for  public  worship ; 
and  thus  the  promise  was  fulfilled  in  them  :  "  I  will  be  to  them  a 
God,"  the  object  of  worship  and  trust ;  "  and  they  shall  be  to  me  a 
people."  They  became  God's  visible  church  ;  and  for  the  most 
part  entered  into  that,  and  into  the  true  and  spiritual  church  at  the 
same  time.  But  this  was  not  the  case  with  all  the  members  ;  and 
we  have  therefore  still  an  election  of  bodies  of  men  to  a  visible 
church  state,  independant  of  their  election  as  "  heirs  of  eternal  life." 
The  children  of  believers,  even  as  children,  and  therefore  incapa- 
ble of  faith,  did  not  remain  in  the  same  state  of  alienation  from  God 
as  the  children  of  unbelievers  ;  nay,  though  but  one  parent  believed, 
yet  the  children  are  pronounced  by  St.  Paul,  to  be  "  holy."  "  For 
the  unbelieving  husband  is  sanctified  by  the  wife,  and  the  unbeliev- 
ing wife,  by  the  husband :  else,  were  your  children  unclean ;  but 
now  they  are  holy."  When  both  parents  believed,  and  trained  up 
their  families  to  believe  in  Christ,  and  to  worship  the  true  God,  the 
case  was  stronger :  the  family  was  then  "  a  church  in  the  house  ;" 
though  all  the  members  of  it  might  not  have  saving  faith.  Sincere 
faith  or  assent  to  the  Gospel,  with  desires  of  instruction  and  salva- 
tion, appear  to  have  uniformly  entitled  the  person  to  baptism  ;  and 
the  use  of  Christian  ordinances  followed.  The  numbers  of  the 
visible  church  swelled  till  it  comprehended  cities,  and  at  last  coun- 


1*0  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

tries  ;  whose  inhabitants  were  thus  elected  to  special  religious  privi- 
leges, and,  forsaking  idols  and  worshipping  God,  constituted  his 
visible  church  among  Gentile  nations.     And  that  the  apostle  Paul 
regarded  all  who  "  called  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord"  as  Christian 
churches,  is  evident  from  his  asserting  his  authority  of  reproof,  and 
counsel,  and  even  excision  over  them,  as  to  their  unworthy  mem- 
bers ;  and  also  from  his  threatening  the  Gentile  churches  with  the 
fate  of  the  Jewish  church  ; — unless  they  stood  by  faith,  they  also 
should  be  "  cut  off;"  that  is,  be  unchurched.    Of  his  full  meaning, 
subsequent  history  gives  the  elucidation  in  the  case  of  those  very 
churches  in  Asia  Minor  which  he  himself  planted ;  and  which, 
departing  from  the  faith  of  Christ,  his  true  doctrine,  have  been,  in 
many  instances,  "  cut  off,"  and  swallowed  up  in  the  Mohammedan 
delusion  ;  so  that  Christ  is  there  no  longer  worshipped.   The  whole 
proves  a  sovereign  unconditional  election  independent  of  personal 
election ;  unconditional  as  to  the  people  to  whom  the  Gospel  was 
first  sent ;  unconditional  as  to  the  children  bom  of  believing  parents ; 
unconditional  as  to  the  inhabitants  of  those  countries  who,  when  a 
Christian  church  was  first  established  among  them,  came,  without 
seeking  it,  into  the  possession  of  invaluable  and  efficacious  means 
and  ordinances  of  Christian  instruction  and  salvation  ;  and  who  all 
finally,  by  education,  became  professors  of  the  true  faith ;  and,  as 
far  as  assent  goes,  sincere  believers.     This  election  too,  as  in  the 
Jewish  church,  was  made  with  reference  to  a  personal  election  into 
the  true  spiritual  church  of  God ;  but  personal  election  was  con- 
ditional.    It  rested,  as  we  have  seen,  upon  personal  repentance 
and  justifying  faith  ;  or  else  we  must  hold  that  men  could  be  mem- 
bers of  the  true  church  without  either.     This  election  was  then 
dependant  upon  the  other ;  and,  instead  of  disproving,  abundantly 
confirms  it.    The  tenor  of  the  apostle's  argument  sufficiently  shows 
that  the  transfer  of  the  church  state  and  relation  from  one  body  of 
men  to  others,  is  that  which  in  this  discourse  he  has  in  view — in 
other  words,  he  speaks  of  the  election  of  bodies  of  men  to  religious 
advantages,  not  of  individuals  to  eternal  life ;  and  however  inti- 
mately the  one  may  be  connected  with  the  other,  the  latter  is  not 
necessarily  involved  in  the  former  ;  since  superior  religious  privi- 
leges, in  all  ages,  have,  to  many,  proved  but  an  aggravation  of  their 
condemnation. 

The  third  kind  of  election  is  personal  election  ;  or  the  election 

of  individuals  to  be  the  children  of  God,  and  the  heirs  of  eternal  life. 

It  is  not  at  all  disputed  between  us  and  those  who  hold  the  Cal- 

vinistic  view  of  election,  whether  believers  in  Christ  are  called  the 

elect  of  God  with  reference  to  their  individual  state  and  individual 


.SECOND.  |  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  Gl 

relation  to  God  as  his  "  people,"  in  the  highest  sense  of  that  phrase. 
Such  passages  as  "  the  elect  of  God  ;"  "  chosen  of  God  ;"  "  chosen 
in  Christ ;"  "  elect  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the 
Father  ;"  and  many  others,  we  allow  therefore,  although  borrowed 
from  that  collective  election  of  which  we  have  spoken,  to  be  de- 
scriptive of  an  act  of  grace  in  favour  of  certain  persons  considered 
individually. 

The  first  question  then  which  naturally  arises,  respects  the  import, 
of  that  act  of  grace  which  is  termed  choosing,  or  an  election.  It 
is  not  a  choosing  to  particular  offices  and  service,  which  is  the  first 
kind  of  election  we  have  mentioned  ;  nor  is  it  that  collective  elec- 
tion to  religious  privileges  and  a  visible  church  state,  on  which  we 
have  more  largely  dwelt.  For  although  "  the  elect"  have  an  indi- 
vidual interest  in  such  an  election  as  parts  of  the  collective  body, 
thus  placed  in  possession  of  the  ordinances  of  Christianity  ;  yet 
many  others  have  the  same  advantages,  who  still  remain  under  the 
guilt  and  condemnation  of  sin  and  practical  unbelief.  The  indi- 
viduals properly  called  "  the  elect,"  are  they  who  have  been  made 
partakers  of  the  grace  and  saving  efficacy  of  the  Gospel.  "  Many," 
says  our  Lord,  "  are  called,  but  few  chosen." 

What  true  personal  election  is,  we  shall  find  explained  in  two 
clear  passages  of  Scripture.  It  is  explained  negatively  by  our  Lord, 
where  he  says  to  his  disciples,  "  I  have  chosen  you  out  of  the  world  :" 
it  is  explained  positively  by  St.  Peter,  when  he  addresses  his  first 
epistle  to  the  "  elect,  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the 
Father,  through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  unto  obedience  and 
sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus."  To  be  elected,  therefore,  is  to 
be  separated  from  "  the  world,"  and  to  be  sanctified  by  the  Spirit, 
and  by  the  blood  of  Christ. 

It  follows,  then,  that  election  is  not  only  an  act  of  God  done  in 
time ;  but  also  that  it  is  subsequent  to  the  administration  of  the 
means  of  salvation.  The  "  calling"  goes  before  the  "  election  ;" 
the  publication  of  the  doctrine  of  "  the  Spirit,"  and  the  atonement, 
called  by  Peter  "  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Christ,"  before  that 
"  sanctification"  through  which  they  become  "  the  elect"  of  God. 
The  doctrine  of  eternal  election  is  thus  brought  down  to  its  true 
meaning.  Actual  election  cannot  be  eternal ;  for,  from  eternity, 
the  elect  were  not  actually  chosen  out  of  the  world,  and  from  eter- 
nity, they  could  not  be  "  sanctified  unto  obedience."  The  phrases, 
"  eternal  election,"  and  "  eternal  decree  of  election,"  so  often  in  the 
lips  of  Calvinists,  can,  in  common  sense,  therefore,  mean  only  an 
eternal  purpose  to  elect ;  or  a  purpose  formed  in  eternity,  to  elect, 
or  choose  out  of  the  world,  and  sanctify  in  time,  by  "the  Spirit  and 


63  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

the  blood  of  Jesus."  This  is  a  doctrine  which  no  one  will  contend 
with  them ;  but  when  they  graft  upon  it  another,  that  God  hath, 
from  eternity,  "  chosen  in  Christ  unto  salvation,"  a  set  number  of 
men,  "certain  quorundam  hominum  multitudinem ;"  not  upon  fore- 
sight of  faith  and  the  obedience  of  faith,  holiness,  or  of  any  other 
good  quality,  or  disposition,  (as  a  cause  or  condition  before  required 
in  man  to  be  chosen ;)  but  unto  faith,  and  the  obedience  of  faith, 
holiness,  &c,  "non  ex  prcevisa  fide,  fideique  obedientia,  sanctitate,  aut 
alia  aliqua  bona  qua  litate  et  dispositione"  <$*c,(6)  it  presents  itself 
under  a  different  aspect,  and  requires  an  appeal  to  the  Word  of  God. 

This  view  of  election  has  two  parts  :  it  is  the  choosing  of  a  set  or 
determinate  number  of  men,  who  cannot  be  increased  or  diminish- 
ed ;  and  it  is  unconditional.     Let  us  consider  each. 

With  respect  to  the  first,  there  is  no  text  of  Scripture  which  teaches 
that  a  fixed  and  determinate  number  of  men  are  elected  to  eternal 
life ;  and  the  passages  which  the  Synod  of  Dort  adduce  in  prool, 
being  such  as  they  only  infer  the  doctrine  from,  the  Synod  them- 
selves allow  that  they  have  no  express  scriptural  evidence  for  this 
tenet.  But  if  there  is  no  explicit  scripture  in  favour  of  the  opinion, 
there  is  much  against  it ;  and  to  this  test  it  must,  therefore,  be  brought. 

The  election  here  spoken  of  must  either  be  election  in  eternity, 
or  election  in  time.  If  the  former,  it  can  only  mean  a  purpose  of 
electing  in  time :  if  the  latter,  it  is  actual  election,  or  choosing  out 
of  the  world. 

Now  as  to  God's  eternal  purpose  to  elect,  it  is  clear,  that  is  a 
subject  on  which  we  can  know  nothing  but  from  his  own  revelation. 
We  take,  then,  the  matter  on  this  ground.  A  purpose  to  elect,  is 
a  purpose  to  save  ;  and  when  it  is  explicitly  declared  in  this  reve- 
lation that  God  "  willeth  all  men  to  be  saved,"  and  that  "  he  willeth 
not  the  death  of  a  sinner,"  either  we  must  say,  that  his  will  is  con- 
trary to  his  purpose,  which  would  be  to  charge  God  foolishly,  and 
indeed  has  no  meaning  at  all ;  or  it  agrees  with  his  purpose :  If 
then  his  will  agrees  with  his  purpose,  that  purpose  was  not  confined 
to  a  "  certain  determinate  number  of  men ;"  but  extended  to  all 
"  whosoever"  should  believe,  that  they  might  be  elected  and  saved. 

Again,  we  have  established  it  as  the  doctrine  of  Scripture,  that 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  died  for  all  men,  that  all  men  through  him 
might  be  saved  ;  but  if  he  died  in  order  to  their  salvation  through 
faith,  he  died  in  order  to  their  election  through  faith ;  and  God 
must  have  purposed  this  from  eternity. 

Farther,  we  have  his  own  message  to  all  to  whom  his  servants 
preach  the  Gospel.     They  are  commanded  to  preach  "to  every 
(6)  Judgment  of  the  Synod  of  Dort. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  iio 

creature," — "  He  that  believeth  shall  be  saved ;  and  he  that  believeth. 
not  shall  be  damned."  This  is  an  unquestionable  decree  of  God 
in  time ;  and,  if  God  be  unchangeable,  it  was  his  decree,  as  touch- 
ing this  matter,  from  all  eternity.  But  this  decree  or  purpose  can 
in  no  way  be  reconciled  to  the  doctrine  of  an  eternal  purpose  to 
elect  only  "  a  set  and  determinate  number."  For  the  Gospel  could 
not  be  good  news  to  "  every  creature"  to  whom  it  should  be  as  such 
proclaimed,  which  is  the  first  contradiction  to  the  text.  Nor  would 
those  who  believe  it  not,  but  who  are  nevertheless  commanded  to 
believe  it,  have  any  power  to  believe  it,  which  is  the  second  con- 
tradiction:  for  since  they  are  to  be  "damned"  for  not  believing, 
they  must  have  had  the  power  to  believe,  or  they  could  not  have 
come  into  condemnation  for  an  act  impossible  to  them  to  perform, 
or  else  we  must  admit  it  as  a  principle  of  the  Divine  government 
that  God  commands  his"  creatures  to  do,  what  under  no  circumstan- 
ces they  can  do  ;  and  then  punishes  them  for  not  doing  what  he 
thus  commands.  Finally,  he  commands  those  that  believe  not,  and 
who  are  alleged  not  to  be  included  in  this  "  fixed  number"  of  elected 
persons,  to  believe  the  good  tidings,  as  a  matter  in  which  they  are 
interested :  they  are  commanded  to  believe  the  Gospel  as  a  truth  ; 
but  if  they  are  not  interested  in  it,  they  are  commanded  to  believe 
a  falsehood,  which  is  the  third  contradiction  ;  and  thus  the  text  and 
the  doctrine  cannot  consist  together. 

As  the  whole  argument  on  this  point  is  involved  in  what  we  have 
already  established  concerning  the  universal  extent  of  the  benefits 
of  Christ's  death,  we  may  leave  it  to  be  determined  by  what  has 
been  advanced  on  that  topic  ;  observing  only,  that  two  of  the  points 
there  confirmed  bear  directly  upon  the  doctrine,  that  election  is 
confined  to  a  "  fixed  number  of  men."  If  we  have  proved  from 
Scripture,  that  the  reason  of  the  condemnation  of  men  lies  in  them- 
selves, and  not  in  the  want  of  a  sufficient  and  effectual  provision 
having  been  made  in  Christ  for  their  salvation,  then  the  number  of 
the  actually  elect  might  be  increased ;  and  if  it  has  been  established 
that  those  for  whom  Christ  died  might  "  perish ;"  and  that  true 
believers  may  "  turn  back  unto  perdition,"  and  be  "  cast  away," 
and  fall  into  a  state  in  which  it  were  better  for  them  "  never  to  have 
known  the  way  of  righteousness,"  then  the  number  of  the  elect  may 
be  diminished.  To  what  has  already  been  said  on  these  subjects 
the  reader  is  referred  ;  and  we  shall  now  only  mention  a  few  of  the 
difficulties  with  which  the  doctrine  of  an  election  from  eternity  of 
a  determinate  number  of  men  to  be  made  heirs  of  eternal  life  is 
attended. 

Whether  men  will  look  to  the  dark  and  repugnant  side  of  this 


64  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

doctrine  of  the  eternal  election  of  a  certain  number  of  men  unto 
salvation,  or  not,  it  unavoidably  follows  from  it,  that  all  but  the 
persons  so  chosen  in  Christ,  are  placed  utterly  and  absolutely,  from 
their  very  birth,  out  of  the  reach  of  salvation ;  and  have  no  share 
at  all  in  the  saving  mercies  of  God,  who  from  eternity  purposed  to 
reject  them,  and  that  not  for  their  fault  as  sinners.  For  all,  except 
Adam  and  Eve,  have  come  into  the  world  with  a  nature  which, 
left  to  itself,  could  not  but  sin  ;  and  as  the  determination  of  God, 
never  to  give  the  reprobate  the  means  of  avoiding  sin,  could  not 
rest  upon  their  fault,  for  what  is  absolutely  inevitable  cannot  be 
charged  on  man  as  his  fault,  so  it  must  rest  where  all  the  high 
Calvinistic  divines  place  it, — upon  the  mere  will  and  sovereign 
pleasure  of  God. 

The  difficulties  of  reconciling  such  a  scheme  as  this  to  the  nature 
of  God,  not  as  it  is  fancied  by  man,  but  as  it  is  revealed  in  his  own 
word  ;  and  to  many  other  declarations  of  Scripture  as  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  administration  both  of  his  law  and  of  his  grace  ;  one 
would  suppose  insuperable  by  any  mind,  and  indeed  are  so  revolt- 
ing, that  few  of  those  who  cling  to  the  doctrine  of  election  will  be 
found  bold  enough  to  keep  them  steadily  in  sight.  They  even 
think  it  uncandid  for  us  who  oppose  these  views  to  pursue  them  to 
their  legitimate  logical  consequences.  But  in  discussion  this  is 
inevitable  ;  and  if  it  be  done  in  fairness,  and  in  the  spirit  of  candour, 
without  pushing  hard  arguments  into  hard  words,  the  cause  of  truth, 
and  a  right  understanding  of  the  Word  of  God,  will  thereby  be 
promoted. 

The  doctrine  of  the  election  to  eternal  life  only  of  a  certain 
determinate  number  of  men  to  salvation,  involving,  as  it  necessarily 
does,  the  doctrine  of  the  absolute  and  unconditional  reprobation  of 
all  the  rest  of  mankind,  cannot,  we  may  confidently  affirm,  be 
reconciled, 

1.  To  the  love  of  God.  "God  is  Love."  "  He  is  loving  to  every 
man  :  and  his  tender  mercies  are  over  all  his  works." 

2.  Nor  to  the  wisdom  of  God  ;  for  the  bringing  into  being  a  vast 
number  of  intelligent  creatures  under  a  necessity  of  sinning,  and  of 
being  eternally  lost,  teaches  no  moral  lesson  to  the  world ;  and 
contradicts  all  those  notions  of  wisdom  in  the  ends  and  processes  of 
government  which  we  are  taught  to  look  for,  not  only  from  natural 
reason,  but  from  the  Scriptures. 

3.  Nor  to  the  grace  of  God,  which  is  so  often  magnified  in  the 
Scriptures  :  "for  doth  it. argue  any  sovereign  or  high  strain;  any 
superabounding  richness  of  grace  or  mercy  in  any  man,  when  ten 
thousand  have  equally  offended  him,  only  to  pardon  one  or  two  of 


■'' 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  (kJ 

them  ?"(7)  And  on  such  a  scheme  can  there  be  any  interpretation 
given  of  the  passage,  "  that  where  sin  had  abounded,  grace  might 
much  more  abound  ]"  or  in  what  sense  has  "  the  grace  of  God 
appeared  unto  all  men ;"  or  even  to  one  millionth  part  of  them  1 

4.  Nor  can  this  merciless  reprobation  be  reconciled  to  any  of 
those  numerous  passages  in  which  Almighty  God  is  represented  as 
tenderly  compassionate,  and  pitiful  to  the  worst  and  most  unworthy 
of  his  creatures,  even  them  who  finally  perish.  "  I  have  no  pleasure 
in  the  death  of  him  that  dieth  :"  "  Being  grieved  at  the  hardness  of 
their  hearts."  "How  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  children 
together,  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye 
would  not."  The.  Lord  is  long  suffering  to  us-ward,  not  willing 
that  any  should  perish."  "  Or  despisest  thou  the  riches  of  his 
goodness,  and  forbearance,  and  long  suffering ;  not  knowing  that 
the  goodness  of  God  leadeth  thee  to  repentance." 

5.  It  is  as  manifestly  contrary  to  his  justice.  Here,  indeed,  we 
would  not  assume  to  measure  this  attribute  of  God,  by  unauthorized 
human  conceptions  ;  but  when  God  himself  has  appealed  to  those 
established  notions  of  justice  and  equity  which  have  been  received 
among  all  enlightened  persons,  in  all  ages,  as  the  measure  and  rule 
of  his  own,  we  cannot  be  charged  with  this  presumption.  "  Shall 
not  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth  do  right .?"  "  Are  not  my  ways  equal  ? 
saith  the  Lord."  We  may  then  be  bold  to  affirm,  that  justice  and 
equity  in  God  are  what  they  are  taken  to  be  among  reasonable 
men ;  and  if  all  men  every  where  would  condemn  it,  as  most  con- 
trary to  justice  and  right,  that  a  sovereign  should  condemn  to  death 
one  or  more  of  his  subjects,  for  not  obeying  laws  which  it  is  abso- 
lutely impossible  for  them,  under  any  circumstances  which  they  can 
possibly  avail  themselves  of,  to  obey,  and  much  more  the  greater 
part  of  his  subjects ;  and  to  require  them,  on  pain  of  aggravated 
punishment,  to  do  something  in  order  to  the  pardon  and  remission 
of  their  offences,  which  he  knows  they  cannot  do,  say  to  stop  the 
tide  or  to  remove  a  mountain ;  it  implies  a  charge  as  awfully  and 
obviously  unjust  against  God,  who  is  so  "  holy  and  just  in  all  his 
doings,"  so  exactly  "just  in  the  judgments  which  he  executeth,"  as 
to  silence  all  his  creatures,  to  suppose  him  to  act  precisely  in  the 
same  manner  as  to  those  whom  he  has  passed  by  and  rejected, 
without  any  avoidable  fault  of  their  own  ;  to  destroy  them  by  the 
simple  rule  of  his  own  sovereignty,  or,  in  other  words,  to  show  that 
he  has  power  to  do  it.  In  whatever  light  the  subject  be  viewed,  no 
fault,  in  any  right  construction,  can  be  chargeable  upon  the  persons 
so  punished,  or,  as  we  may  rather  say,  destroyed,  since  punishment 

(7)  Goodwin's  Agreement  and  DifferpnrK 

Vol.  Til  0 


ti$  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

supposes  a  judicial  proceeding,  which  this  act  shuts  out.  For  either 
the  reprobates  are  destroyed  for  a  pure  reason  of  sovereignty, 
without  any  reference  to  their  sinfulness,  and  thus  all  criminality  is 
left  out  of  the  consideration  ;  or  they  are  destroyed  for  the  sin  of 
Adam,  to  which  they  were  not  consenting  ;  or  for  personal  faults 
resulting  from  a  corruption  of  nature  which  they  brought  into  the 
world  with  them,  and  which  God  wills  not  to  correct,  and  they  have 
no  power  to  correct  themselves.  Every  received  notion  of  justice 
is  thus  violated.  We  grant,  indeed,  that  some  proceedings  of  the 
Almighty  may  appear  at  first  irreconcilable  with  justice,  which  are 
not  so ;  as  that  we  should  suffer  pain  and  death,  and  be  infected 
with  a  morally  corrupt  nature,  in  consequence  of  the  transgression 
of  our  first  progenitors  ;  that  children  should  suffer  for  their  parents' 
faults  in  the  ordinary  course  of  providence  ;  and  that,  in  general 
calamities,  the  comparatively  innocent  should  suffer  the  same  evils 
as  the  guilty.  But  none  of  these  are  parallel  cases.  For  the  "  free 
gift"  has  come  upon  all  men,  "  in  order  to  justification  of  life," 
through  "  the  righteousness"  of  the  second  Adam,  so  that  the  terms 
of  our  probation  are  but  changed.  None  are  doomed  to  inevitable 
ruin,  or  the  above  words  of  the  apostle  would  have  no  meaning ; 
and  pain  and  death,  as  to  all  who  avail  themselves  of  the  remedy, 
are  made  the  instruments  of  a  higher  life,  and  of  a  superabounding 
of  grace  through  Christ.  The  same  observation  may  be  made  as 
to  children  who  suffer  evils  for  their  parents'  faults.  This  circum- 
stance alters  the  terms  of  their  probation  ;  but  if  every  condition  of 
probation  leaves  to  men  the  possibility  and  the  hope  of  eternal  life, 
and  the  circumstances  of  all  are  balanced  and  weighed  by  him  who 
administers  the  affairs  of  individuals  on  principles,  the  end  of  which 
is  to  turn  all  the  evils  of  life  into  spiritual  and  higher  blessings,  there 
is,  obviously,  no  impeachment  of  justice  in  the  circumstances  of  the 
probation  assigned  to  any  person  whatever.  As  to  the  innocent 
suffering  equally  with  the  guilty  in  general  calamities,  the  persons 
so  suffering  are  but  comparatively  innocent,  and  their  personal 
transgressions  against  God  deserve  a  higher  punishment  than  any 
which  this  life  witnesses  ;  this  may  also  as  to  them  be  overruled  for 
merciful  purposes,  and  a  future  life  presents  its  manifold  compensa- 
tions. But  as  to  the  non-elect,  the  whole  case,  in  this  scheme  of 
sovereign  reprobation,  or  sovereign  pretention,  is  supposed  to  be 
before  us.  Their  state  is  fixed,  their  afflictions  in  this  life  will  not 
in  any  instance  be  overruled  for  ends  of  edification  and  salvation  ; 
they  are  left  under  a  necessity  of  sinning  in  every  condition  ;  and 
a  future  life  presents  no  compensation,  but  a  fearful  looking  for  of 
fiery  and  quenchless  indignation.     It  is  surely  not  possible  for  the 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  t>7 

ingenuity  of  man  to  reconcile  this  to  any  notion  of  just  government 
which  has  ever  obtained  ;  and  by  the  established  notions  of  justice 
and  equity  in  human  affairs,  we  are  taught  by  the  Scriptures  them- 
selves to  judge  of  the  Divine  proceedings  in  all  completely  stated  and 
comprehensible  cases. 

6.  Equally  impossible  is  it  to  reconcile  this  notion  to  the  sin- 
cerity of  God  in  offering  salvation  by  Christ  to  all  who  hear  the 
Gospel,  of  whom  this  scheme  supposes  the  majority,  or  at  least 
great  numbers,  to  be  among  the  reprobate.  The  gospel,  as  we  have 
seen,  is  commanded  to  be  preached  to  "  every  creature ;"  which 
publication  of  "  good  news  to  every  creature,"  is  an  offer  of  salva- 
tion "  to  every  creature,"  accompanied  with  earnest  invitations  to 
embrace  it,  and  admonitory  comminations  lest  any  should  neglect 
and  despise  it.  But  does  it  not  involve  a  serious  reflection  upon 
the  truth  and  sincerity  of  God  which  men  ought  to  shudder  at,  to 
assume,  at  the  very  time  the  Gospel  is  thus  preached,  that  no  part 
of  this  good  news  was  ever  designed  to  benefit  the  majority,  or  any 
great  part  of  those  to  whom  it  is  addressed  ?  that  they  to  whom  this 
love  of  God  in  Christ  is  proclaimed  were  never  loved  by  God  1  that 
he  has  decreed  that  many  to  whom  he  offers  salvation,  and  whom 
he  invites  to  receive  it,  shall  never  be  saved  ?  and  that  he  will  con- 
sider their  sins  aggravated  by  rejecting  that  which  they  never  could 
receive,  and  which  he  never  designed  them  to  receive  1  It  is  no 
answer  to  this  to  say,  that  we  also  admit  that  the  offers  of  mercy 
are  made  by  God  to  many  whom  he,  by  virtue  of  his  prescience, 
knows  will  never  receive  them.  We  grant  this  ;  but,  not  now  to 
enter  upon  the  question  of  foreknowledge,  it  is  enough  to  reply,  that 
here  there  is  no  insincerity.  On  the  Calvinian  scheme  the  offer  of 
salvation  is  made  to  those  for  whose  sins  Christ  made  no  atonement ; 
on  ours,  he  made  atonement  for  the  sins  of  all.  On  the  former, 
the  offer  is  made  to  those  whom  God  never  designed  to  embrace 
it ;  on  ours,  to  none  but  those  whom  God  seriously  and  in  truth 
wills  that  they  should  avail  themselves  of  it ;  on  their  theory,  the 
bar  to  the  salvation  of  the  non-elect  lies  in  the  want  of  a  provided 
sacrifice  for  sin ;  on  ours,  it  rests  solely  in  men  themselves  ;  one 
consists,  therefore,  with  a  perfect  sincerity  of  offer,  the  other  can- 
not be  maintained  without  bringing  the  sincerity  of  God  into  ques- 
tion, and  fixing  a  stigma  upon  his  moral  truth. 

7.  Unconditional  reprobation  cannot  be  reconciled  with  that 
frequent  declaration  of  Scripture,  that  God  is  no  respecter  op 
persons.  This  phrase,  we  grant,  is  not  to  be  interpreted  as  though 
the  bounties  of  the  Almighty  were  dispensed  in  equal  measures  to 
his  creatures.     In  the  administration  of  favour,  there  is  place  for 


68  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

the  exercise  of  that  prerogative  which,  in  a  just  sense,  is  called  the 
sovereignty  of  God  ;  but  justice  knows  but  of  one  rule  ;  it  is,  in  its 
nature,  settled  and  fixed,  and  respects  not  the  person,  but  the  case. 
"  To  have  respect  of  persons"  is  a  phrase,  therefore,  in  Scripture, 
which  sometimes  refers  to  judicial  proceedings,  and  signifies  to  judge 
from  partiality  and  affection,  and  not  upon  the  merits  of  the  ques- 
tion. It  is  also  used  by  St.  Peter  with  reference  to  the  acceptance 
of  Cornelius  :  "  Of  a  truth  I  perceive  that  God  is  no  respecter  of 
persons ;  but  in  every  nation  he  that  feareth  him,  and  worketh 
righteousness,  is  accepted  with  him."  Here  it  is  clear,  that  to  respect 
persons,  would  be  to  reject  or  accept  them  without  regard  to  their 
moral  qualities,  and  on  some  national  or  other  prejudice  or  partiality 
which  forms  no  moral  rule  of  any  kind.  But  if  the  doctrine  of 
absolute  election  and  reprobation  be  true  ;  if  we  are  to  understand 
that  men  like  Jacob  and  Esau,  in  the  Calvinistic  construction  of  the 
passage,  whilst  in  the  womb  of  their  mother,  nay  from  eternity,  are 
loved  and  hated,  elected  or  reprobated,  before  they  have  done 
"  good  or  evil,"  then  it  necessarily  follows,  that  there  is  precisely 
this  kind  of  respect  of  persons  with  God ;  for  his  acceptance  or 
rejection  of  men  stands  on  some  ground  of  aversion  or  dislike,  which 
cannot  be  resolved  into  any  moral  rule,  and  has  no  respect  to  the 
merits  of  the  case  itself;  and  if  the  Scripture  affirms  that  there  is  no 
such  respect  of  persons  with  God,  then  the  doctrine  which  implies 
it  is  contradicted  by  inspired  authority. 

8.  The  doctrine  of  which  we  are  showing  the  difficulties,  brings 
with  it  the  repulsive  and  shocking  opinion  of  the  eternal  punish- 
ment of  infants.  Some  Calvinists  have  indeed,  to  get  rid  of  the 
difficulty,  or  rather  to  put  it  out  of  sight,  consigned  them  to  annihi- 
lation ;  but  of  the  annihilation  of  any  human  being  there  is  no 
intimation  in  the  Word  of  God.  In  order,  therefore,  to  avoid  the 
fearful  consequence  of  admitting  the  punishment  of  beings  innocent 
as  to  all  actual  sin,  there  is  no  other  way  than  to  suppose  all  children, 
dying  in  infancy,  to  be  an  elected  portion  of  mankind,  which,  how- 
ever, would  be  a  mere  hypothesis  brought  in  to  serve  a  theory 
without  any  e¥idence.  That  some  of  those  who,  as  they  suppose, 
are  under  this  sentence  of  reprobation,  die  in  their  infancy,  is,  pro- 
bably, what  most  Calvinists  allow  ;  and  if  their  doctrine  be  received 
cannot  be  denied ;  and  it  follows,  therefore,  that  all  such  infants 
are  eternally  lost.  Now  we  know  that  infants  are  not  lost  because 
our  Lord  gave  it  as  a  reason  why  little  children  ought  not  to  be  hin- 
dered from  coming  unto  him,  that  '*  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  hea- 
verk"  On  which  Calvin  himself  remarks,  (8)  "in  this  word,  'for 
(8)  Harm,  in  Matt,  xix,  13. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  69 

of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven,'  Christ  comprehends  as  well  littk 
children  themselves,  as  those  who  in  disposition  resemble  them.  Hac 
voce,  tarn  parvulos,  quam  eorum  similes,  comprehendit."  We  are 
assured  of  the  salvation  of  infants,  also,  because  "the  free  gift  has 
come  upon  all  men  to  [in  order  to]  justification  of  life,"  and  because 
children  are  not  capable  of  rejecting  that  blessing,  and  must,  there- 
fore, derive  benefit  from  it.  The  point,  also,  on  which  we  have 
just  now  touched,  that  "  there  is  no  respect  of  persons  with  God," 
demonstrates  it.  For,  as  it  will  be  acknowledged,  that  some  chil- 
dren, dying  in  infancy,  are  saved,  it  must  follow,  from  this  principle 
and  axiom  in  the  Divine  government,  that  all  infants  are  saved  :  for 
the  case  of  all  infants,  as  to  innocence  or  guilt,  sin  or  righteousness, 
being  the  same,  and  God,  as  a  judge,  being  "  no  respecter  of  per- 
sons," but  regarding  only  the  merits  of  the  case  ;  he  cannot  make 
this  awful  distinction  as  to  them,  that  one  part  shall  be  eternally 
saved  and  the  other  eternally  lost.  That  doctrine,  therefore,  which 
implies  the  perdition  of  infants  cannot  be  congruous  to  the  Scrip- 
tures of  truth ;  but  is  utterly  abhorrent  to  them.  (9) 

9.  Finally,  not  to  multiply  these  instances  of  the  difficulties  which 
accompany  the  doctrine  of  absolute  reprobation,  or  of  pretention, 
(to  use  the  milder  term,  though  the  argument  is  not  in  the  least 
changed  by  it,)  it  destroys  the  end  of  punitive  justice.  That  end 
can  only  be  to  deter  men  from  offence,  and  to  add  strength  to  the 
law  of  God.  But  if  the  whole  body  of  the  reprobate  are  left  to  the 
influence  of  their  fallen  nature  without  remedy,  they  cannot  be 
deterred  from  sin  by  threats  of  inevitable  punishment ;  nor  can  they 
ever  submit  to  the  dominion  of  the  law  of  God  :  their  doom  is  fixed, 
and  threats  and  examples  can  avail  nothing. 

We  may  leave  every  candid  mind  to  the  discussion  of  these  and 
many  other  difficulties,  suggested  by  the  doctrine  of  the  Synod  of 
Dort,  as  to  the  election  of  "  a  set  and  determinate  number  of  men" 
to  eternal  life  ;  and  proceed  to  consider  the  second  branch  of  this 
opinion — that  election  is  unconditional.  "  It  was  made,"  says  the 
synod,  "  not  upon  foresight  of  faith,  and  the  obedience  of  faith, 
holiness,  or  any  other  good  quality  or  disposition,  (as  a  cause  or 
condition  before  required  in  men  to  be  chosen,)  but  unto  faith,  and 
the  obedience  of  faith,  holiness,  &c." 

Election,  we  have  already  said,  must  be  either  God's  purpose  in 
eternity  to  elect  actually,  or  it  must  be  actual  election  itself  in  time  ; 
for  as  election  is  choosing  men  "  out  of  the  world,"  into  the  true 
church  of  Christ,  actual  election  from  eternity  is  not  possible,  be- 
cause the  subjects  of  election  had  no  existence  ;  there  was  no  world 
W  On  the  case  of  infants  see  vol.  ii,  part  2,  page  221. 


/O  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

to  choose  them  "  out  of,"  and  no  church  into  which  to  bring  them. 
To  affirm  that  any  part  of  mankind  were  chosen  from  eternity,  in 
purpose,  (for  in  no  other  way- could  they  be  chosen,)  to  become 
members  of  the  church  without  "  foresight  of  faith,  and  the  obedi- 
ence of  faith ;"  is  therefore  to  say,  that  God  purposed  from  all 
eternity  to  establish  a  distinction  between  the  world,  "out"  of 
which  the  elect  are  actually  chosen,  and  the  church,  which  has 
no  foundation  in,  or  respect  to,  faith  and  obedience  ;  in  other  words, 
to  constitute  his  church  of  persons  to  whose  faith  and  obedience  he 
had  no  respect.  For  how  is  this  conclusion  to  be  avoided  1  The 
subject  of  this  election,  it  seems,  are  chosen  as  men,  as  Peter,  James, 
and  John,  not  as  believers.  God  eternally  purposed  to  make  Peter, 
James,  and  John  members  of  his  church,  without  respect  to  their 
faith  or  obedience  ;  his  church  is  therefore  constituted  on  the  sole 
principle  of  this  purpose,  not  upon  the  basis  of  faith  and  obedience  ; 
and  the  persons  chosen  into  it  in  time  are  chosen  because  they  are 
of  the  number  included  in  this  eternal  purpose,  and  with  no  regard 
to  their  being  believers  and  obedient,  or  the  contrary.  How  mani- 
festly this  opposes  the  Word  of  God  we  need  scarcely  stay  to  point 
out.  It  contradicts  that  specific  distinction  constantly  made  in 
Scripture  between  the  true  church  and  the  world,  the  only  marks 
of  distinction  being,  as  to  the  former,  faith  and  obedience  ;  and  as 
to  the  latter,  unbelief  and  disobedience — in  other  words,  the  church 
is  composed  not  merely  of  men,  as  Peter,  James,  and  John  ;  but  of 
Peter,  James,  and  John  believing  and  obeying :  whilst  all  who  be- 
lieve not,  and  obey  not,  are  "  the  world."  The  Scriptures  make 
the  essential  elements  of  the  church  to  be  believing  and  obeying 
men  ;  the  Synod  of  Dort  makes  them  to  be  men  in  the  simple  con- 
dition of  being  included  in  a  set  and  determinate  number,  chosen 
with  no  respect  to  faith  and  obedience.  Thus  we  have  laid  two 
very  different  foundations  upon  which  to  place  the  superstructure 
of  the  church  of  Christ ;  one  of  them  indeed  is  to  be  found  in  the 
Scriptures,  but  the  other  only  in  the  theories  of  men ;  and  as  they 
agree  not  together,  one  of  them  must  be  renounced. 

But  election,  without  respect  to  faith,  is  contrary  also  to  the  history 
of  the  commencement  and  first  constitution  of  the  church  of  Christ. 
Peter,  James,  and  John  did  not  become  disciples  of  Christ  in  unbe- 
lief and  disobedience.  The  very  act  of  their  becoming  disciples  of 
Christ,  unequivocally  implied  some  degree  both  of  faith  and  obedi- 
ence. They  were  chosen,  not  as  men,  but  as  believing  men.  This 
is  indicated  also  by  the  grand  rite  of  baptism,  instituted  by  Christ 
when  he  commissioned  his  disciples  to  preach  the  Gospel,  and  call 
men  into  his  church.     That  baptism  was  the  gate  into  this  church 


■ 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  11 

cannot  be  denied  ;  but  faith  was  required  in  order  to  baptism ;  and, 
where  true  faith  existed,  this  open  confession  of  Christ  would 
necessarily  follow,  without  delay.  Here,  then,  we  see  on  what, 
grounds  men  were  actually  elected  into  the  church  of  Christ ;  it; 
was  with  respect  to  their  faith  that  they  were  thus  chosen  out  of  the 
world,  and  thus  chosen  into  the  church.  The  rule,  too,  is  universal, 
and  if  so,  if  it  universally  holds  good  that  actual  election  has  respect 
to  faith,  then,  unless  God's  eternal  purpose  to  elect  be  at  variance 
with  his  electing,  that  is,  unless  he  purposes  one  thing  and  does 
another  differing  from  his  purpose  ;  purposes  to  elect  without  re- 
spect to  faith ;  and  only  actually  elects  with  respect  to  faith  ;  his 
eternal  purpose  to  elect  had  respect  both  to  faith  and  obedience. 

It  is  true,  that  the  Synod  of  Dort  says,  that  election  is  "  unto  faith, 
and  the  obedience  of  faith,"  &c,  thereby  making  the  end  of  election 
to  be  faith :  in  other  words  their  doctrine  is,  that  some  men  were 
personally  chosen  to  believe  and  obey,  even  before  they  existed. 
But  we  have  no  such  doctrine  in  Scripture  as  the  election  of  indi- 
viduals unto  faith  ;  and  it  is  inconsistent  with  several  passages  which 
expressly  speak  of  personal  election. 

"  Many  are  called  and  few  chosen."  In  this  passage  we  must 
understand,  that  the  many  who  are  called,  are  called  to  believe  and 
obey  the  Gospel,  or  the  calling  means  nothing ;  in  other  words  they 
are  not  called.  But  if  the  end  of  this  calling  be  faith  and  obedi- 
ence, and  the  end  of  election  also  be  faith  and  obedience,  then  have 
we  in  the  text  a  senseless  tautology  ;  for  if  the  many  are  called  to 
believe  and  obey,  then,  of  course,  we  need  not  have  been  told  that 
the  few  are  chosen  to  believe  and  obey,  since  the  few  are  included 
in  the  many.  But  if  the  "  choosing"  of  the  "  few"  means,  as  it 
must,  something  different  to  the  "  calling"  of  the  "  many,"  then  is 
the  end  of  election  different  to  the  end  of  calling ;  and  if  the  election 
be,  as  is  plain  from  the  passage,  consequent  upon  the  calling,  then 
it  can  mean  nothing  else  than  the  choosing  of  those  "  few"  of  the 
"  many,"  who  being  obedient  to  the  "  calling,"  had  previously  be- 
lieved and  obeyed,  into  the  true  church  and  family  of  God,  which 
is  the  proper  and  direct  object  of  personal  election.  This  passage, 
therefore,  which  unquestionably  speaks  of  personal  election,  con- 
tradicts the  notion  of  an  election  unto  faith  and  obedience,  and 
makes  our  election  consequent  upon  our  obedience  to  the  calling,  or 
evangelical  invitation. 

Let  this  notion  of  personal  election  unto  faith  be  tested  also  by 
another  passage,  in  which,  like  the  former,  personal  election  is 
spoken  of.  "  I  have  chosen  you  out  of  the  world,"  John  xv,  1 9. 
According  to  the  notion  of  the  Synod  of  Dort,  the  act  of  election 


'        ( 


WS  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

consists  in  appointing-  or  ordaining  a  certain  number  of  the  human 
race  to  believe  and  obey;  here  the  personal  electing  act  is  a 
choosing  out  of  the  world,  a  choosing,  manifestly,  into  the  number 
of  Christ's  disciples,  which  no  man  is  capable  of  without  a  previous 
faith  ;  for  the  very  act  of  becoming  Christ's  disciple  was  a  confes- 
sion of  faith  in  him. 

A  third  passage,  in  which  election  is  spoken  of  as  personal,  or  at 
least  with  more  direct  reference  to  individual  experience,  than  to 
Christians  in  their  collective  capacity  as  the  church  of  Christ,  is 
1  Peter  i,  2,  "  Elect  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the 
Father,  through  sanctihcation  of  the  Spirit  unto  obedience,  and 
sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus  !"  Here  obedience  is  not  the  end 
of  election,  but  of  the  sanctihcation  of  the  Spirit ;  and  both  are 
joined  "  with  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jesus,"  (which,  in  all 
cases,  is  apprehended  by  faith,)  as  the  media  through  which  our 
election  is  effected — "  elect  through  sanctihcation  of  the  Spirit,"  &c. 
These  cannot,  therefore,  be  the  ends  of  our  personal  election  ;  for 
if  we  are  elected  "  through"  that  sanctihcation  of  the  Spirit  which 
produces  obedience,  we  are  not  elected,  being  unsanctified  and 
disobedient,  in  order  to  be  sanctified  by  the  Spirit  that  we  may 
obey :  it  is  the  work  of  the  Spirit  which  produces  obedient  faith, 
and  through  both  we  are  "  elected"  into  the  church  of  God. 

Very  similar  to  the  passage  just  explained  is  2  Thess.  ii,  13,  14, 
"  But  we  are  bound  to  give  thanks  alvvay  to  God  for  you,  brethren, 
because  God  hath  from  the  beginning  chosen  you  unto  salvation, 
through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit  and  belief  of  the  truth  ;  where- 
unto  he  called  you  by  our  Gospel  to  the  obtaining  of  the  glory  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  As  the  apostle  had  been  predicting  the 
future  apostasy  of  persons  professing  Christianity,  he  recollects, 
with  gratitude,  that  from  "  the  beginning"  from  the  very  first  recep- 
tion of  the  Gospel  in  Thessalonic.a,  which  was  preached  there  by 
St.  Paul  himself  with  great  success,  the  Thessalonians  had  mani- 
fested no  symptoms  of  this  apostasy,  but  had  been  honourably 
steadfast  in  the  faith.  For  this  he  gives  thanks  to  God  in  the  verses 
above  quoted,  and  in  the  15th  exhorts  them  still  "to  stand  fast." 
When,  therefore,  Calvinistic  commentators  interpret  the  clause 
"hath  chosen  you  from  the  beginning,"  to  mean  election  from 
eternity,  they  make  a  gratuitous  assumption  which  has  nothing  in 
the  scope  of  the  passage  to  warrant  it.  Mr.  Scott,  indeed,(l)  rather 
depends  upon  the  "  calling"  of  the  Thessalonians  being,  as  he  states, 
subsequent  to  their  election,  then,  upon  an  arbitrary  interpretation 
of  the  clause  "  from  the  beginning"  and  says,  "  if  the  calling  of  the 

(1)  Notes  in  lor 


SECOMJ.J  I  I1KOLOG1CAL  INSTITUTES.  *« 

Thessalonians  was  the  effect  of  any  preceding  choice  ot  them,  it 
comes  to  the  same  thing  whether  the  choice  was  made  the  preceding 
day,  or  from  the  foundation  of  the  world."  But  the  calling  of  the 
members  of  this  church  is  not  represented  by  the  apostle  as  the  effect 
of  their  having  been  chosen,  but  on  the  contrary,  their  election  is 
spoken  of  as  the  effect  of  "  the  sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  and 
belief  of  the  truth  ;"  and  these,  as  the  effects  of  the  calling  of  the 
Thessalonians  by  the  Gospel, — "  whereunto,"  to  which  sanctifica- 
tion and  faith,  "  he  called  you  by  ou~  Gospel."  Or  the  whole  may 
be  considered  as  the  antecedent  to  the  next  clause  "to  which" 
election  from  the  beginning,  through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  and 
belief  of  the  truth,  "  he  called  you  by  our  Gospel."  Certain  it  is, 
that  sanctification  and  belief  of  the  truth  cannot  be  the  ends  of 
election  if  they  are  the  means  of  it,  as  they  are  here  said  to  be  ;  and 
we  may  therefore  conclude  from  this,  as  well  as  from  the  other 
passages  we  have  quoted  as  speaking  of  the  personal  election  of 
believers,  that  this  kind  of  election  is  not  "  unto  faith  and  obedience," 
as  stated  in  "  the  Judgment  of  the  Synod  of  Dort,"  that  is,  a  choice 
of  individuals  to  be  made  believers  and  obedient  persons ;  but  an 
election,  as  it  is  expressed  both  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  through 
faith  and  obedience  ;  or,  in  other  words,  a  choice  of  persons 
already  believing  and  obedient  into  the  family  of  God. 

There  are  scarcely  any  other  passages  in  the  New  Testament, 
which  speak  expressly  of  personal  election ;  but  there  is  another 
class  of  texts  in  which  the  term  election  occurs,  which  refer  to 
believers,  not  distributively,  but  collectively  ;  not  personally,  but  as 
a  body,  either  existing  as  particular  churches,  or  as  the  universal 
church  ;  and,  by  entirely  overlooking,  or  ingeniously  confounding 
this  obvious  distinction,  the  advocates  of  unconditional  personal 
election  bring  forward  such  passages  with  confidence,  as  proofs  of 
the  doctrine  of  election  unto  faith  furnished  by  the  word  of  God. 
Thus  the  Synod  of  Dort  quotes,  as  the  leading  proof  of  its  doctrine 
of  personal  election,  Eph.  i,  4,  5,  6,  "  According  as  he  hath  chosen 
us  in  him  before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  that  we  should  be 
holy  and  without  blame  before  him  in  love  :  having  predestinated 
us  unto  the  adoption  of  children  by  Jesus  Christ,  to  himself,  accord- 
ing to  the  good  pleasure  of  his  will,  to  the  praise  of  the  glory  of  his 
grace,  wherein  he  hath  made  us  accepted  in  the  beloved."  This, 
indeed,  is  the  only  passage  quoted  by  the  Synod  of  Dort,  in  winch 
the  terms  chosen  and  election  occur ;  and,  we  may  ask,  why  none 
of  those  on  which  we  have  above  offered  some  remarks,  were 
quoted  also,  since  the  subject  of  personal  election  is  much  more 
obviously  contained  in  them  than  in  that  which  they  have  adduced  ? 

Vol.  in.  in 


74  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

The  only  answer  is,  that  the  others  were  perceived  not  to  accord 
with  the  doctrine  of  "  election  unto  faith  and  obedience  ;"  whilst 
this,  in  which  the  personal  election  of  individual  believers  is  not 
referred  to,  but  the  collective  election  of  the  whole  body  of  Chris- 
tians, was  better  suited  to  give  a  colour  to  their  doctrine,  because 
it  speaks,  of  course,  and  as  the  subject  required,  of  election  as  the 
means  of  faith,  and  of  faith  as  the  end  of  election,  an  order  which  is 
reversed  when  the  election  of  individuals,  or  the  election  of  any  body 
of  believers,  considered  distributively  and  personally,  is  the  subject  of 
the  apostle's  discourse.  If,  indeed,  the  election  spoken  of  in  this 
passage  were  personal  election,  the  Calvinistic  doctrine  would  not 
follow  from  it ;  because  it  would  admit  of  being  questioned,  whether 
the  choosing  in  Christ  before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  here 
mentioned,  was  a  choice  of  certain  persons,  as  men  merely,  or  as 
believing  men,  which  is  surely  the  most  rational.  For  all  choice 
necessarily  supposes  some  reason ;  but,  as  men,  all  things  were  equal 
between  those  who,  according  to  this  scheme,  were  chosen,  and 
those  who  were  passed  by.  But,  according  to  the  Calvinists,  this 
election  was  made  arbitrarily,  that  is,  without  any  reason,  but  that 
God  would  have  it  so  ;  and  to  this  sense  they  bend  the  clause  in  the 
passage  under  consideration,  "  according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  his 
will."  This  phrase  has,  however,  no  such  arbitrary  sense.  "  The 
good  pleasure  of  his  will"  means  the  benevolent  and  full  acqui- 
escence of  the  will  of  God  with  a  wise  and  gracious  act ;  and, 
accordingly,  in  verse  11,  the  phrase  is  varied  "according  to  the 
counsel  of  his  own  will,"  an  expression  which  is  at  utter  variance 
with  the  repulsive  notion  that  mere  will  is  in  any  case  the  rule  of 
the  Divine  conduct,  or,  in  other  words,  that  he  does  any  thing 
merely  because  he  will  do  it,  which  excludes  all  "  counsel."  To 
choose  men  to  salvation  considered  as  believers,  gives  a  reason  for 
election  which  not  only  manifests  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God, 
but  has  the  advantage  of  being  entirely  consistent  with  his  own 
published  and  express  decree  :  "  he  that  believeth  shall  be  saved  ; 
and  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned."  This  revealed  and 
promulgated  decree,  we  must  believe,  was  according  to  his  eternal 
purpose ;  and  if  from  eternity  he  determined  that  believers,  and 
only  believers  in  Christ,  among  the  fallen  race,  should  be  saved,  the 
conclusion  is  inevitable  that  those  whom  he  chose  in  Christ  "  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world,"  were  considered,  not  as  men  merely, 
which  gives  no  reason  of  choice  worthy  of  any  rational  being,  much 
less  of  the  ever  blessed  God  ;  but  as  believing  men,  which  harmo- 
nizes the  doctrine  of  election  with  the  other  doctrines  of  Scripture, 
instead  of  placing  it,  as  in  the  Calvinistic  seheme,  in  opposition  to 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  75 

them.  For  the  choice  not  being  of  certain  men,  as  such  ;  but  of 
all  persons  believing ;  and  all  men  to  whom  the  Gospel  is  preached, 
being  called  to  believe,  every  one  may  place  himself  in  the  number 
of  the  persons  so  elected.  Thus  we  get  rid  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
election  of  a  set  and  determinate  number  of  men  ;  and  with  that, 
of  the  fearful  consequence,  the  absolute  reprobation  of  all  the  rest, 
which  so  few  Calvinists  themselves  have  the  courage  to  avow  and 
maintain. 

But  though  this  argument  might  be  very  successfully  urged 
against  those  who  interpret  the  passage  above  quoted  of  personal 
election,  the  context  bears  unequivocal  proofs  that  it  is  not  of  an 
election  or  predestination  of  this  kind  of  which  the  apostle  speaks  ; 
but  of  the  election  of  believing  Jews  and  Gentiles  into  the  church 
of  God  ;  in  other  words,  of  the  eternal  purpose  of  God,  upon  the 
publication  of  the  Gospel,  to  constitute  his  visible  church  no  longer 
upon  the  ground  of  natural  descent  from  Abraham,  but  upon  the 
foundation  of  faith  in  Christ.  For  upon  no  other  hypothesis  can 
that  distinction  which  the  apostle  makes  between  the  Jews  who  first 
believed,  and  the  Gentile  Ephesians,  who  afterwards  believed,  be 
at  all  explained.  He  speaks  first  of  the  election  of  Christians  in 
general,  whether  Jews  or  Gentiles  ;  using  the  pronouns  "  us"  and 
"  we"  as  comprehending  himself  and  all  others.  He  then  proceeds 
to  the  "  predestination"  of  those  "  who  first  trusted  in  Christ :" 
plainly  meaning  himself  and  other  believing  Jews.  He  goes  on  to 
say,  that  the  Ephesians  were  made  partakers  of  the  same  faith,  and 
therefore  were  the  subjects  of  the  same  election  and  predestina- 
tion :  "  in  whom  ye  also  trusted  after  that  ye  heard  the  word  of 
truth :"  the  preaching  of  which  truth  to  them  as  Gentiles,  by  the 
apostle  and  his  coadjutors,  was,  in  consequence  of  God  "  having 
made  known  unto  them  the  mystery  of  his  will,  that  in  the  dispen- 
sation of  the  fulness  of  times  he  might  gather  together  in  one  all 
things  in  Christ ;"  which,  in  the  next  chapter,  a  manifest  continu- 
ance of  the  same  head  of  discourse,  is  explained  to  mean  the  calling 
in  of  the  Gentiles  with  the  believing  Jews,  reconciling  "  both  unto 
God  in  one  body  by  the  cross,  having  slain  the  enmity  thereby." 
The  same  subject  he  pursues  in  the  third  chapter,  representing  this 
union  of  believing  Jews  and  Gentiles  in  one  church  as  the  revela- 
tion of  the  mystery  which  had  been  hid  "  from  the  beginning  of  the 
world ;"  but  was  now  manifested  "  according  to  the  eternal  pur- 
pose which  he  purposed  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord,"  verses  8-11. 
Here  then  we  have  the  true  meaning  of  the  election  and  predesti- 
nation of  the  Ephesians  spoken  of  in  the  opening  of  the  epistle  :  it 
was  their  election,  as  Gentiles,  to  be,  along  with  the  believing  Jews, 


1U  UIEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTE*.  [PARI 

the  church  of  God,  his  acknowledged  people  on  earth ;  which 
election  was  according  to  God's  "  eternal  purpose,"  to  change  the 
constitution  of  his  church  ;  to  establish  it  on  the  ground  of  faith  in 
Christ :  and  thus  to  extend  it  into  all  nations.  So  far  as  this  re- 
spected the  Ephesians  in  general,  their  election  to  hear  the  Gospel 
sooner  than  many  other  Gentiles  was  unconditional  and  sovereign, 
and  was  an  election  "  unto  faith  and  obedience  of  faith  ;"  that  is  to 
say,  these  were  the  ends  of  that  election  ;  but  so  far  as  the  Ephe- 
sians were  concerned,  as  individuals,  they  were  actually  chosen 
into  the  church  of  Christ  as  its  vital  members,  on  their  believing ; 
and  so  the  election  to  the  saving  benefits  of  the  Gospel  was  a  conse- 
quence of  their  faith,  and  not  the  end  of  it,  and  was  therefore  condi- 
tional— "  in  whom  also  ye  trusted,  after  that  ye  heard  the  Word 
of  Truth,  the  Gospel  of  your  salvation  ;  in  whom  also,  after  that  ye 
believed,  ye  were  sealed  with  the  Holy  Spirit  of  promise." 

The  Calvinistic  doctrine  of  election  unto  faith  has  no  stronger- 
passage  than  this  to  lean  upon  for  support ;  and  this  manifestly 
fails  them  :  whilst  other  passages  in  which  the  terms  election,  ov 
chosen  occur,  all  favour  a  very  different  view  of  the  Scripture  doc- 
trine. When  we  are  commanded  to  be  diligent  "to  make  our 
calling  and  election  sure,"  or  firm,  this  supposes  that  it  may  be 
rendered  nugatory  by  want  of  diligence  ;  a  doctrine  which  cannot 
comport  with  the  absolute  certainty  of  our  salvation  as  founded 
upon  a  decree  determining,  infallibly,  our  personal  election  to 
eternal  life,  and  our  faith  and  obedience  in  order  to  it.  When 
believers  are  called  a  "  chosen  generation,"  they  are  also  called  "  a 
royal  priesthood,  a  holy  people  ;"  and  if  the  latter  characteristics 
depend  upon,  and  are  consequences  of  faith,  so  the  former  depends 
upon  a  previous  faith,  and  is  the  consequence  of  it.  Finally,  although 
these  terms  themselves  occur  in  but  few  passages,  and  in  all  of 
them  which  respect  the  personal  experience  of  individuals  express, 
or  necessarily  imply,  the  previous  condition  of  faith,  there  are  many 
others,  which,  in  different  terms,  embody  the  same  doctrine.  The 
phrases  to  be  "  in  Christ,"  and  to  be  "  Christ's,"  are,  doubtless, 
equivalent  to  the  personal  election  of  believers :  and  these,  and 
similar  modes  of  expression,  are  constantly  occurring  in  the  New 
Testament ;  but  no  man  is  ever  represented  as  "  Christ's,"  or  as 
"  in  Christ,"  by  an  eternal  election  unto  faith  ;  but,  on  the  contrary* 
as  entering  into  that  relation  which  is  termed  being  "  in  Christ ; 
or  being  "  Christ's,"  through  personal  faith  alone.  The  Scripture 
"knows  no  such  distinctions  as  elect  unbelievers,  and  elect  believers ; 
but  all  unbelievers  are  represented  as  "  of  the  world ;"  under 
c<  condemnation,"  so  that  "  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  upon  them  :'* 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  77 

and  as  liable  to  eternal  ruin.  But  if  Calvinistic  election  be  true, 
then  there  are  elect  unbelievers  ;  and. with  respect  to  these,  the 
doctrine  of  Scripture  is  contradicted  :  for  they  are  not  "  of  the 
world,"  though  in  a  state  of  unbelief,  since  God  from  eternity 
"  chose  them  out  of  the  world ;"  they  are  not  under  condemnation, 
"but  were  justified  from  eternity;"  "the  wrath  of  God  does  not 
abide  upon  them,"  for  (hey  are  objects  of  an  unchangeable  love 
which  has  decreed  their  salvation  :  subject  to  no  conditions  what- 
ever ;  and  therefore  no  state  of  unbelief  can  make  them  objects  of 
wrath,  as  no  condition  of  faith  can  make  them  objects  of  a  love 
which  was  moved  by  no  such  consideration.  Nor  are  they  liable 
to  ruin.  They  never  were,  nor  can  be  liable  to  it :  the  very  threats 
of  God  are  without  meaning  as  to  them,  and  their  consciousness  of 
guilt  and  danger  under  the  awakenings  of  the  Spirit  are  deceptious, 
and  unreal ;  contradicting  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  the-  heart  of 
man.  as  the  Spirit  of  Truth.  For  if  he  "convinces  them  of 
sin,"  he  convinces  them  of  danger ;  but  they  are,  in  fact,  in  no 
danger  ;  and  the  monstrous  conclusion  follows  inevitably,  that  the 
Spirit  is  employed  in  exciting  fears  which  have  no  foundation. 

We  have  thus  considered  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  election  ;  ant! 
as  we  find  nothing  in  it  which  can  warrant  any  one  to  limit  the 
meaning  of  the  texts  we  have  adduced  to  prove  that  Christ  made 
an  actual  atonement  for  the  sins  of  all  mankind,  we  may  proceed 
to  examine  another  class  of  Scripture  proofs  quoted  by  Calvinists 
to  strengthen  their  argument : — those  which  speak  of  the  "  calling" 
and  "predestination"  of  believers. 

The  terms  "to  call,"  "called,"  and  "calling,"  very  frequently 
occur  in  the  New  Testament,  and  especially  in  the  Epistles.  Some- 
times "  to  call"  signifies  to  invite  to  the  blessings  of  the  Gospel,  to 
offer  salvation  through  Christ,  either  by  God  himself,  or  under  his 
appointment,  by  his  servants ;  and  in  the  parable  of  the  marriage 
of  the  king's  son,  Matt,  xxii,  1-14,  which  appears  to  have  given 
rise  to  many  instances  of  the  use  of  this  term  in  the  Epistles,  we 
have  three  descriptions  of  "  called,"  or  invited  persons.  First,  the 
disobedient  who  would  not  come  in  at  the  call ;  but  made  light  of 
it.  Second,  the  class  of  persons  represented  by  the  man  who,  when 
the  king  came  in  to  see  his  guests,  had  not  on  the  wedding  gar- 
ment ;  and  with  respect  to  whom  our  Lord  makes  the  general 
remark,  "  for  many  are  called,  but  few  are  chosen."  The  persons 
thus  represented  by  this  individual  culprit,  were  not  only  "  called," 
but  actually  came  into  the  company.  Third,  the  approved  guests  ; 
those  who  were  both  called  and  chosen.  As  far  as  the  simple 
calling,  or  invitation  is  concerned,  all  these  three  classes  stand  upon 


78  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

equal  ground ;  all  were  invited ;  and  it  depended  upon  their  choice 
and  conduct  whether  they. embraced  the  invitation,  and  were  ad- 
mitted as  guests.  We  have  nothing  here  to  countenance  the  Cal- 
vinistic  fiction,  which  is  termed  "effectual  calling."  This  implies 
an  irresistible  influence  exerted  upon  all  the  approved  guests,  but 
withheld  from  the  disobedient,  who  could  not,  therefore,  be  other- 
wise than  disobedient ;  or  at  most  could  only  come  in  without  that 
wedding  garment,  which  it  was  never  put  into  their  power  to  take 
out  of  the  king's  wardrobe  ;  the  want  of  which,  would  necessarily 
exclude  them,  if  not  from  the  church  on  earth,  yet  from  the  church 
in  heaven.  The  doctrine  of  the  parable  is  in  entire  contradiction 
to  this  ;  for  they  who  refused,  and  they  who  complied  but  partially 
with  the  calling,  are  represented,  not  merely  as  being  left  without 
the  benefit  of  the  feast ;  but  as  incurring  additional  guilt  and  con- 
demnation for  refusing  the  invitation.  It  is  to  this  offer  of  salvation 
by  the  Gospel,  this  invitation  to  spiritual  and  eternal  benefits,  that 
St.  Peter  appears  to  refer,  when  he  says,  Acts  ii,  39,  "  For  the  pro- 
mise is  unto  you,  and  to  your  children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar  off, 
even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call  :"  a  passage  which, 
we  may  observe,  in  passing,  declares  "  the  promise"  to  be  as  exten- 
sive as  the  "  calling  ;"  in  other  words,  as  the  offer  or  invitation.  To 
this  also,  St.  Paul  refers,  Rom.  i,  5,  6.  "  By  whom  we  have  receiv- 
ed grace  and  apostleship  for  obedience  to  the  faith  among  all  nations, 
for  his  name  :"  that  is,  to  publish  his  Gospel,  in  order  to  bring  all 
nations  to  the  obedience  of  faith  ;  "  among  whom  are  ye  also  the 
called  of  Jesus  Christ ;"  you  at  Rome  have  heard  the  Gospel, 
and  have  been  invited  to  salvation  in  consequence  of  this  design. 
This  promulgation  of  the  Gospel,  by  the  ministry  of  the  apostle, 
personally,  under  the  name  of  calling,  is  also  referred  to  in  Gala- 
tians,  i,  6,  "I  marvel  that  ye  are  so  soon  removed  from  him  that 
called  you  into  the  grace  of  Christ,"  (obviously  meaning  that  it  was 
the  apostle  himself  who  had  called  them  by  his  preaching  to  the 
grace  of  Christ,)  "unto  another  Gospel."  So  also  in  chap,  v,  13, 
"  For,  brethren,  ye  have  been  called  unto  liberty."  Again,  1  Thess. 
ii,  12,  "  That  ye  would  walk  worthy  of  God,  who  hath  called  you 
[invited  you]  to  his  kingdom  and  glory." 

In  our  Lord's  parable  it  will  also  be  observed,  that  the  persons 
called  are  not  invited  as  separate  individuals  to  partake  of  solitary 
blessings;  but  they  are  called  to  "a  feast,"  into  a  company,  or 
society,  before  whom  the  banquet  is  spread.  The  full  revelation  of 
the  transfer  of  the  visible  church  of  Christ  from  Jews  by  birth,  to 
believers  of  all  nations,  was  not,  however,  then  made.  When  this 
branch  of  the  evangelic  system  was  fully  revealed  to  the  apostles., 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  7ff 

and  taught  by  them  to  others,  that  part  of  our  Lord's  parable  which 
was  not  at  first  developed,  was  more  particularly  inculcated  by  his 
inspired  followers.  The  calling  of  guests  to  the  evangelical  feast, 
we  now  more  fully  learn,  was  not  the  mere  calling  of  men  to  par- 
take of  spiritual  benefits ;  but  calling  them  also  to  form  a  spiritual 
society  composed  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  the  believing  men  of  all 
nations  ;  to  have  a  common  fellowship  in  these  blessings,  and  to  be 
formed  into  this  fellowship  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  their  num- 
ber, and  diffusing  the  benefits  of  salvation  among  the  people  or 
nation  to  which  they  respectively  belonged.  The  invitation,  "  the 
calling"  of  the  first  preachers,  was  to  all  who  heard  them  in  Rome, 
in  Ephesus,  in  Corinth,  in  all  other  places ;  and  those  who  em- 
braced it,  and  joined  themselves  to  the  church  by  faith,  baptism, 
and  continued  public  profession,  were  named  especially  and  emi- 
nently "  the  called  ;"  because  of  their  obedience  to  the  invitation. 
They  not  only  put  in  their  claim  to  the  blessings  of  Christianity 
individually ;  but  became  members  of  the  new  church,  that  spirit- 
ual society  of  believers  which  God  now  visibly  owned  as  his  people. 
As  they  were  thus  called  into  a  common  fellowship  by  the  Gospel, 
this  is  sometimes  termed  their  "  vocation :"  as  the  object  of  this 
church  state  was  to  promote  "  holiness,"  it  is  termed  a  "  holy  voca- 
tion :"  as  sanctity  was  required  of  the  members,  they  are  said  to 
have  been  "  called  to  be  saints :"  as  the  final  result  was,  through 
the  mercy  of  God,  to  be  eternal  life,  we  hear  of  "  the  hope  of  their 
calling ;"  and  of  their  being  "  called  to  his  eternal  glory  by  Christ 
Jesus." 

These  views  will  abundantly  explain  the  various  passages  in 
which  the  term  "  calling"  occurs  in  the  Epistles,  Rom.  ix,  24, 
"Even  us  whom  he  hath  called,  not  of  the  Jews  only ;  but  also 
of  the  Gentiles :"  that  is,  whom  he  hath  made  members  of  his 
church  through  faith.  1  Cor.  i,  24,  "  But  unto  them  which  arc 
called,  both  Jews  and  Greeks,  Christ  the  power  of  God,  and  the 
wisdom  of  God  ;"  the  wisdom  and  efficacy  of  the  Gospel  being,  of 
course,  acknowledged  in  their  very  profession  of  Christ,  in  opposi- 
tion to  those  to  whom  the  preaching  of  "  Christ  crucified,"  was  "  a 
stumbling  block,"  and  "foolishness."  1  Cor.  vii,  18,  "  Is  any  man 
called  :"  (brought  to  acknowledge  Christ,  and  to  become  a  mem- 
ber of  his  church)  "  being  circumcised,  let  him  not  become  uncir- 
cumcised  :  is  any  called  in  uncircumcision,  let  him  not  be  circum- 
cised." Eph.  iv,  1-4,  "That  ye  walk  worthy  of  the  vocation, 
wherewith  ye  are  called.  There  is  one  body,  and  one  spirit,  even 
as  ye  are  called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling."  1  Thess.  ii,  12, 
"That  ye  would  walk  worthy  of  God,  who  hath  called  yon  to  his 


SO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  frART 

kingdom  and  glory."  2  Thess.  ii,  13,  14,  "  Through  sanctification 
of  the  Spirit  and  belief  of  the  truth,  whereunto  he  called  you  by 
our  Gospel,  to  the  obtaining  of  the  glory  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 
2  Tim.  i,  9,  10,  "Who  hath  saved  us  and  called  us  with  a  holy 
calling ;  not  according  to  our  works,  but  according  to  his  own  pur- 
pose and  grace,  which  was  given  us  in  Christ  Jesus,  before  the- world 
began  ;  but  is  now  made  manifest  by  the  appearing  of  our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ :"  on  which  passage  we  may  remark,  that  the  object 
of  the  "  calling,"  and  the  "  purpose,"  mentioned  in  it,  must  of  ne- 
cessity be  interpreted  to  mean  the  establishment  of  the  church  on 
the  principle  of  faith ;  and  not,  as  formerly,  on  natural  descent. 
For  personal  election,  and  a  purpose  of  effectual  personal  calling, 
could  not  have  been  hidden  till  manifested  by  the  appearing  of 
Christ ;  since  every  instance  of  true  conversion  to  God  in  any  age 
prior  to  the  appealing  of  Christ,  would  be  as  much  a  manifestation 
of  eternal  election,  and  an  instance  of  personal  effectual  calling", 
according  to  the  Calvinistic  scheme,  as  it  was  after  the  appearance 
of  Christ.  The  apostle  is  speaking  of  a  purpose  of  God,  which  was 
kept  secret  till  revealed  by  the  Christian  system  ;  and,  from  various 
other  parallel  passages,  we  learn  that  this  secret,  this  "  mystery," 
as  he  often  calls  it,  was  the  union  of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  in  "one 
body,"  or  church,  by  faith.  .    . 

In  none  of  these  passages  is  the  doctrine  of  the  exclusive  calling 
of  any  set  number  of  men  contained  ;  and  the  Synod  of  Dort,  as 
though  they  felt  this,  only  attempt  to  reason  the  doctrine  from  a 
text  not  yet  quoted  ;  but  which  we  will  now  examine.  It  is  Rom. 
viii,  30 :  "  Whom  he  did  predestinate,  them  he  also  called ;  and 
whom  he  called,  them  he  also  justified  ;  and  whom  he  justified,  them 
he  also  glorified."  This  is  the  text  on  which  Calvinists  chiefly  rest 
their  doctrine  of  effectual  calling  ;  and  tracing  it,  as  they  say, 
through  its  steps  and  links,  they  conclude,  that  a  set  and  determi- 
nate number  of  persons  having  been  predestinated  unto  salvation, 
this  set  number  only  are  called  effectually,  then  justified,  and  finally 
glorified.  The  words  of  the  Synod  of  Dort  are,  "he  hath  chosen 
a  set  number  of  certain  men,  neither  better,  nor  more  worthy  than 
others ;  but  lying  in  the  common  misery  with  others,  to  salvation 
in  Christ,  whom  he  had  also  appointed  the  Mediator  and  Head  of 
the  elect ;  and  the  foundation  of  salvation  from  all  eternity  ;  and  so 
he  decreed  to  give  them  to  him  to  be  saved ;  and  eifectually  to 
call,  and  draw  them  to  a  communion  with  him,  by  his  word  and 
Spirit ;  or  to  give  them  a  true  faith  in  him  :  to  justify,  sanctify,  and 
finally  glorify  them ;  having  been  kept  in  the  communion  of  his 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  81 

Son,  to  the  demonstration  of  his  mercy,  and  the  praise  of  the  riches 
of  his  glorious  grace."  (2) 

The  text  under  consideration  is  added  by  the  Synod,  in  proof  of 
the  doctrine  of  this  article  ;  but  it  was  evidently  nothing  to  the 
purpose,  unless  it  had  spoken  of  a  set  and  determinate  number  of 
men  as  predestinated  and  called,  independent  of  any  consideration 
of  their  faith  and  obedience  ;  which  number,  as  being  determinate, 
would,  by  consequence,  exclude  the  rest.  As  these  are  points  on 
which  the  text  is  at  least  silent,  there  is  nothing  in  it  unfriendly  to 
those  arguments  founded  on  explicit  texts  of  Holy  Writ  which  have 
been  already  urged  against  this  view  of  election ;  and  with  this 
notion  of  election  is  refuted,  also,  the  cognate  doctrine  of  effectual 
calling,  considered  as  a  work  of  God  in  the  heart  of  which  the  elect 
only  can  be  the  subjects.  But  the  passage,  having  been  pressed 
into  so  alien  a  service,  deserves  consideration ;  and  it  will  be  found 
that  it  indeed  speaks  of  the  privileges  and  hopes  of  true  believers  ; 
but  not  of  those  privileges  and  hopes  as  secured  to  them  by  any 
such  decree  of  election  as  the  Synod  has  advocated.  To  prove 
this,  we  remark,  1.  That  the  chapter  in  which  the  text  is  found,  is 
the  lofty  and  animating  conclusion  of  St.  Paul's  argument  on  justifi- 
cation by  faith  :  it  is  a  discourse  of  that  present  state  of  pardon  and 
sanctity,  and  of  that  future  hope  of  felicity,  into  which  justification 
introduces  believers,  notwithstanding  those  sufferings  and  persecu- 
tions of  the  present  life  to  which  those  to  whom  he  wrote  were 
exposed,  and  under  which  they  had  need  of  encouragement.  It 
was,  obviously,  not  in  his  design  here  to  speak  of  the  doctrines  of 
election  and  non-election,  however  these  doctrines  may  be  under- 
stood. There  is  nothing  in  the  course  of  his  argument  which  leads 
to  them  ;  and  those  who  make  use  of  the  text  in  question  for  this 
purpose  are  obliged,  therefore,  to  press  it,  by  circuitous  inference,, 
into  their  service. 

2.  As  the  passage  stands  in  intimate  connexion  with  an  important 
and  elucidatory  context,  it  ought  not  to  be  considered  as  insulated 
and  complete  in  itself;  which  has  been  the  great  source  of  errone- 
ous interpretations.  Under  the  sufferings  of  the  present  time,  the 
apostle  encourages  those  who  had  believed  with  the  hope  of  glori- 
ous resurrection  :  this  forms  the  subject  of  his  consolatory  remarks 
from  verse  1 7  to  25.  The  assistance  and  "  intercession"  of  the 
Spirit ;  and  the  working  of  "all  things  together  for  good  to  them 
that  love  God,  to  them  who  are  the  called  according  to  his  purpose  :" 
Hearly  meaning  those  who,  according  to  the  Divine  design,  had 

(2)  Sentcntia  de  Divina  Procdcst.  Art.  7.  Est  autem  Elcctio  irrrtrratabilo  Dei 
propositum,  &c. 

Vol.  Ill  1 1 


82  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

received  and  embraced  the  Gospel  in  truth,  form  two  additional 
topics  of  consolatory  suggestion.  The  passage  under  consideration 
immediately  follows,  and  is  in  full,  for  the  Synod  has  quoted  it  short : 
"  And  we  know  that  all  things  work  together  for  good  to  them  that 
love  God,  to  them  who  are  the  called  (who  are  called)  according 
to  his  purpose.  For  whom  he  did  foreknow,  he  also  did  predesti- 
nate to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he  might  be  the 
first-born  among  many  brethren.  Moreover,  whom  he  did  predes- 
tinate, them  he  also  called ;  and  whom  he  called,  them  he  also 
justified  ;  and  whom  he  justified,  them  he  also  glorified."  The 
connexion  is  here  manifest.  "  The  sufferings  of  the  present  time 
could  only  work  together  for  the  good"  of  them  that  "  love  God,w 
by  being  connected  with,  and  compensated  in  a  future  state  by,  a 
glorious  resurrection  from  the  dead ;  and  therefore  the  apostle 
shows  that  this  was  the  design  of  God,  the  ultimate  and  triumphant 
result  of  the  administration  of  his  grace,  that  they  who  love  God 
here,  should  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  in  his  glorified 
state,  that  he  might  be  "  the  first-born  among  brethren  :"  the  head 
and  chief  of  the  redeemed,  who  shall  be  acknowledged  as  his 
"  brethren,"  and  co-heirs  of  his  glory.  Thus  the  whole  of  the  29th 
verse,  is  a  reason  given  to  show  why  "  all  things,  however  painful 
in  the  present  life,  work  together  for  good  to  them  that  love  God  ;" 
and  it  is  therefore  introduced  by  the  connective  particle,  'on,  which 
has  here,  obviously,  a  causal  signification,  "for  (because)  whom  he 
did  foreknow,  he  also  did  predestinate." 

3.  The  apostle  is  here  speaking,  we  grant,  not  of  the  foreknow- 
ledge or  predestination  of  bodies  of  men  to  church  privileges  ;  but 
of  the  experience  of  believers,  taken  distributively  and  personally. 
This  will,  however,  be  found  to  strengthen  our  argument  against 
the  use  made  of  the  latter  part  of  the  passage  by  the  Synod  of  Dort. 

It  is  affirmed  of  believers,  that  they  were  "foreknown."  This 
term  may  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  fore-approved.  For  not  only  is 
it  common  with  the  sacred  writers  to  express  approval  by  the  phrase 
"  to  knoio ;"  of  which  Hebraism  the  instances  are  many  in  the  New 
Testament ;  but  in  Rom.  xi,  2,  "  to  foreknow,"  is  best  interpreted 
into  this  meaning.  "  God  hath  not  cast  away  his  people  which  he 
foreknew."  It  is  not  of  the  whole  people  of  Israel  of  which  the 
apostle  here  speaks,  as  the  context  shows ;  but  of  the  believing 
part  of  them,  called  subsequently  "  the  remnant  according  to  the 
election  of  grace  :"  a  clause  which  has  been  before  explained.  The 
question  put  by  the  apostle  into  the  mouth  of  an  objecting  Jew,  is, 
"  Hath  God  cast  away  his  people  ?"  This  is  denied ;  but  the  illus- 
tration taken  from  the  reservation  of  seven  thousand  men,  in  the 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  83 

time  of  Elijah,  who  had  not  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal,  proves  that 
St  Paul  meant  to  say,  that  God  had  cast  off,  from  being  members 
of  his  church,  all  but  the  remnant ;  all  but  his  people  whom  he 
"foreknew ;"  those  who  had  laid  aside  the  inveterate  prejudices  of 
their  nation,  and  had  entered  into  the  new  Christian  church  by 
faith.  These  he  foreknew,  that  is  approved  ;  and  so  received  them 
into  his  church.  In  this  sense  of  the  term  foreknew,  the  text  in 
question  harmonizes  well  with  the  context.  "  All  things  work  to- 
gether for  good  to  them  that  love  God,"  &c.  "  For,  whom  he  did 
foreknow,"  (approve  as  lovers  of  him,)  "  he  predestinated  to  be 
conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,"  in  mind  and  temper  here,  and 
especially  in  glory  hereafter. 

The  second  sense  of  foreknowing  is  that  of  simple  prescience  ; 
and  if  any  prefer  this  we  shall  not  dispute  with  him,  since  it  will 
come  to  the  same  issue.  The  foreknowledge  of  men  must  have 
respect  either  simply  to  their  existence  as  persons,  or  as  existing 
under  some  particular  circumstances  and  characters.  If  persons 
only  be  the  objects  of  this  foreknowledge,  then  has  God's  prescience 
no  more  to  do  with  the  salvation  of  the  elect,  than  of  the  non-elect, 
since  all  are  equally  foreknown  as  persons  in  a  state  of  existence  : 
and  we  might  as  well  argue  the  glorification  of  the  reprobate  from 
God's  foreknowing  them,  in  this  sense,  as  that  of  the  elect.  The 
objects  of  this  foreknowledge,  then,  must  be  men  under  certain 
circumstances  and  characters;  not  in  their  simple  existence  as 
rational  beings.  If,  therefore,  the  term  "  foreknow,"  in  the  passage 
above  cited,  "God  hath  not  cast  away  his  people  whom  he  fore- 
knew," be  taken  in  the  sense  of  prescience,  those  of  the  general 
mass  of  Jews,  who  were  not  "  cast  away,"  were  foreknown  under 
some  circumstance  and  character  which  distinguished  them  from 
the  others  ;  and  what  this  was,  is  made  sufficiently  plain  from  the 
context, — the  persons  foreknown,  were  the  then  believing  part  of 
the  Jews,  "  even  so  then,  at  this  present  time  also,  there  is  a  remnant, 
according  to  the  election  of  grace."  Equally  clear  are  the  circum- 
stances and  character  under  which,  more  generally,  the  apostle 
represents  believers  as  having  been  foreknown  in  the  text  more 
immediately  under  examination.  Those  "  whom  he  did  foreknow," 
are  manifestly  the  believers  of  whom  he  speaks  in  the  discourse  ; 
and  who  are  called  in  chap,  viii,  28,  "  them  that  love  God."  Under 
some  character  he  must  have  foreknown  them,  or  his  foreknowledge 
of  them  would  not  be  special  and  distinctive  ;  it  would  afford  no 
ground  from  which  to  argue  any  thing  respecting  them ;  it  could 
make  no  difference  between  them  and  others.  This  specific  charac- 
ter is  given  by  the  apostle  ;  but  it  is  not  that  which  is  gratuitously 


84  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

assumed  by  the  Synod  of  Dort  a  selection  of  them  from  the  mass  ; 
without  respect  to  their  faith.  It  is  their  faith  itself:  for  of  be- 
lievers only  is  St.  Paul  speaking  as  the  subjects  of  this  foreknow- 
ledge ;  and  such  believers  too  as  "  love  God,"  and  who,  having 
actually  embraced  the  heavenly  invitation,  are  emphatically  said  to 
be,  as  before  explained,  "  called  according  to  his  purpose." 

To  predestinate,  or  to  determine  before  hand,  is  the  next  term 
in  the  text ;  but  here  it  is  also  to  be  remarked,  that  the  persons 
predestinated,  or  before  determined  to  be  glorified  with  Christ,  are 
the  same  persons,  under  the  same  circumstances  and  character,  as 
those  who  are  said  to  have  been  foreknown  of  God  ;  and  what  has 
been  said  under  the  former  term,  applies  therefore,  in  part,  to  this. 
The  subjects  of  predestination  are  the  persons  foreknown,  and  the 
persons  foreknown,  are  true  believers  :  foreknown  as  such,  or  they 
could  not  have  been  specially,  or  distinctively  foreknown,  accord- 
ing to  the  doctrine  of  the  apostle.  This  predestination,  then,  is  not 
of  persons  "  unto  faith  and  obedience,"  but  of  believing  and  obe- 
dient persons  unto  eternal  glory.  Nor  are  faith  and  obedience 
mentioned  any  where  as  the  end  of  predestination,  except  in  Eph. 
chap,  i,  where  we  have  already  proved,  when  treating  of  election, 
that  the  predestination  spoken  of  in  that  chapter,  is  the  eternal  pur- 
pose of  God  to  choose  the  Gentile  Ephesians  into  his  church,  along 
with  the  believing  Jews  ;  and  that  what  is  there  said,  is  not  intended 
of  personal,  but  of  collective  election  and  predestination,  and  that 
to  the  means  and  ordinances  of  salvation.  For  the  argument,  by 
which  this  is  established,  let  the  reader,  to  prevent  repetition,  turn 
back. 

The  passage  before  us,  then,  declares,  that  true  believers  were 
foreknown,  and  predestinated  to  eternal  glory ;  and  when  the  apos- 
tle adds,  "  moreover  whom  he  did  predestinate,  them  he  also  called  ; 
and  whom  he  called,  them  he  also  justified  ;  and  whom  he  justified, 
them  he  also  glorified :"  he  shows  in  particular  how  the  Divine 
purpose  to  glorify  believers  is  carried  into  effect,  through  all  its 
stages.  The  great  instrument  of  bringing  men  to  "  love  God"  is 
the  Gospel ;  they  are  therefore  called,  invited  by  it,  to  this  state 
and  benefit:  the  calling  being  obeyed,  they  are  justified;  and 
being  justified,  and  continuing  in  that  state  of  grace,  they  are  glo- 
rified. This  is  the  plain  and  obvious  course  of  the  amplification 
pursued  by  the  apostle  ;  but  let  us  remark  how  many  unscriptural 
notions  the  Synod  of  Dort  engrafts  upon  it.  First,  a  "certain 
number"  of  persons,  not  as  believers,  but  as  men,  are  foreknown  ; 
then  a  decree  of  predestination  to  eternal  life  goes  forth  in  their 
favour ;  but  still  without  respect  to  them  as  believing  men  as  the 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  85 

subjects  of  that  decree  ; — then  we  suppose,  by  another  decree,  (for 
the  first  cannot  look  at  qualities  at  all,)  and  by  a  second  predestina- 
tion they  are  to  be  made  believers ; — then  they  are  exclusively 
"called  :"  then  infallibly  justified  ;  and  being  justified,  are  infallibly 
glorified.  In  opposition  to  these  notions,  we  have  already  shown, 
that  the  persons  spoken  of  are  foreknown  and  predestinated  as 
believers,  not  as  men,  or  persons  ;  and  we  may  also  oppose  scrip- 
tural objections  to  every  other  part  of  the  interpretation. 

As  to  calling,  we  allow  that  all  of  whom  the  apostle  speaks  are 
necessarily  "  called  ;"  for  since  he  is  discoursing  of  the  predestina- 
tion of  believers  in  Christ  to  eternal  glory,  and  does  not  touch  the 
question  of  the  salvation,  or  otherwise,  of  those  who  have  not  the 
means  of  becoming  such,  the  calling  of  the  Gospel  is  necessarily 
supposed,  as  it  is  only  upon  that  Divine  system  being  proposed  to 
their  faith,  that  they  could  become  believers  in  Christ.  But  though 
all  such  as  the  apostle  speaks  of,  are  "  called ;"  they,  are  not  the 
only  persons  called :  on  the  contrary,  our  Lord  declares,  that 
"many  are  called,  but/eio  chosen."  To  confine  the  calling  here 
spoken  of  to  those  who  are  actually  saved,  it  was  necessary  to  invent 
the  fiction  of  "  effectual  calling,"  which  is  made  peculiar  to  the 
elect ;  but  calling  is  the  invitation,  and  offer,  and  publication  of  the 
Gospel :  a  bringing  men  into  a  state  of  Christian  privilege  to  be 
improved  unto  salvation,  and  not  an  operation  in  them.  Effectual 
invitation,  effectual  offer,  and  effectual  publication,  are  turns  of  the 
phrase  which  sufficiently  expose  the  delusiveness  of  their  comment. 
By  effectual  calling,  they  mean  an  inward  compelling  of  the  mind  to 
embrace  the  outward  invitation  of  theVxospel,  and  to  yield  to  the 
inward  solicitations  of  the  Spirit  which  accompanies  it ;  but  this, 
whether  true  or  false,  is  a  totally  different  thing  from  all  that  the 
New  Testament  terms  "calling"  It  is  true,  that  some  embrace 
the  call,  and  others  reject  it,  yet  is  there  in  the  "  calling"  of  the 
Scripture  nothing  exclusively  appropriate  to  those  who  are  finally 
saved ;  and  though  the  apostle  supposes  those  whom  he  speaks  of 
in  the  text  as  "  called,"  to  have  been  obedient,  he  confines  not  the 
calling  itself  to  them  so  as  to  exclude  others, — still  "  many  are 
called."  Nor  is  the  Synod  more  sound  in  assuming  that  all  nho 
are  called  are  "justified."  If  "many  are  called,  and  few  chosen,*" 
this  assumption  is  unfounded  :  nay,  all  compliances  with  the  call, 
do  not  issue  in  justification  ;  for  the  man  who  not  only  heard  the 
call,  but  came  in  to  the  feast,  put  not  on  the  wedding  garment,  and 
was  therefore  finally  cast  out.  Equally  contradictory  to  the  Scrip- 
ture is  it  so  to  explain  St.  Paul  here,  as  to  make  him  say,  that  all 
who  are  justified,  are  also  elorified.     The  justified  are  glorified ; 


8&  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

but  not,  as  we  have  seen  from  various  texts  of  Scriptures  already, 
all  who  are  justified.  For  if  we  have  established  it,  that  the  per- 
sons who  "  turn  back  to  perdition  ;"  "  make  shipwreck  of  faith,  and 
of  a  good  conscience ;"  who  turn  out  of  the  "  way  of  righteousness ;" 
who  forget  that  they  were  "purged  from  their  old  sins  ;"  who  have 
"  tasted  the  good  word  of  God,  and  the  powers  of  the  world  to 
come  ;  and  were  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and  were 
"  sanctified"  with  the  blood,  they  afterwards  "  counted  an  unholy 
thing ;"  are  represented  by  the  apostles  to  have  been  in  a  state  of 
grace  and  acceptance  with  God,  through  Christ ;  then  all  persons 
justified,  are  not  infallibly  glorified ;  but  only  such  are  saved  as 
"  endure  to  the  end  ;"  and  they  only  receive  that  "  crown  of  life," 
who  are  "  faithful  unto  death." 

The  clear  reason  why  the  apostle,  having  stated  that  true  be- 
lievers were  foreknown  and  predestinated,  introduces  also  the  order 
and  method  of  their  salvation,  was,  to  connect  that  salvation  with 
the  Gospel,  and  the  work  of  Christ ;  and  to  secure  to  him  the  glory 
of  it.  The  Gospel  reveals  it,  that  those  who  "  love  God,"  shall  find 
that  "  all  things  work  together  for  their  good,"  because  (o<n)  they 
are  "  predestinated  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  the  Son  of 
God,  in  his  glory  ;  yet  the  Gospel  did  not  find  them  lovers  of  God, 
but  made  them  so.  Since,  therefore,  none  but  such  persons  were 
so  foreknown  and  predestinated  to  be  heirs  of  glory,  the  Gospel 
calling  was  issued  according  to  "  his  purpose,"  or  plan  of  bringing 
them  that  love  him  to  glory,  in  order  to  produce  this  love  in  them. 
"  Whom"  he  thus  called,  assuming  them  to  be  obedient  to  the  call, 
he  justified  ;  "and  whom  he  justified,"  assuming  them  to  be  faithful 
unto  death,  he  "glorified."  But  since  the  persons  predestinated 
were  contemplated  as  believers,  not  as  a  certain  number  of  persons ; 
then  all  to  whom  the  invitation  was  issued  might  obey  that  call,  and 
all  might  be  justified,  and  all  glorified.  In  other  words,  all  who 
heard  the  Gospel,  might,  through  it,  be  brought  to  love  God  ;  and 
might  take  their  places  among  those  who  were  "  predestinated  to 
be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son."  For  since  the  predestina- 
tion, as  we  have  seen,  was  not  of  a  certain  number  of  persons,  but 
of  all  believers  who  love  God  ;  then,  either  it  must  be  allowed,  that 
all  who  were  called  by  the  Gospel,  might  take  the  character  and 
circumstances  which,  would  bring  them  under  the  predestination 
mentioned  by  the  apostle  ;  or  else  those  who  deny  this,  are  bound 
to  the  conclusion,  that  God  calls  (invites)  many,  whom  he  never 
intends  to  admit  to  the  celestial  feast ;  and  not  only  so,  but  punishes 
them,  with  the  severity  of  a  relentless  displeasure,  for  not  obeying 
an  invitation  which  he  never  designed  them  to  accept,  and  which 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  87 

they  never  had  the  power  to  accept.  In  other  words,  the  inteq3ret- 
ation  of  this  passage  by  the  Synod  of  Dort  obliges  all  who  follow 
it  to  admit  all  the  consequences  connected  with  the  doctrine  of 
reprobation,  as  before  stated. 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

An  Examination  of  certain  Passages  of  Scripture,  sup- 
posed to  limit  the  Extent  of  Christ's  Redemption. 

Having  now  shown,  that  those  passages  of  Holy  Writ,  in  which 
the  terms  election,  calling,  predestination,  and  foreknow- 
ledge occur,  do  not  warrant  those  inferences,  by  which  Calvinists 
attempt  to  restrain  the  signification  of  those  declarations  with 
respect  to  the  extent  of  the  benefit  of  Christ's  death  which  are 
expressed  in  terms  so  universal  in  the  New  Testament,  w»  may 
conclude  our  investigation  of  the  sense  of  Scripture  on  this  point, 
by  adverting  to  some  of  those  insulated  texts  which  are  most  fre- 
quently adduced  to  support  the  same  conclusion. 

John  vi,  37,  "  All  that  the  Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to  me  ; 
and  him  that  cometh  to  me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out." 

It  is  inferred  from  this,  and  some  similar  passages  in  the  Gospels, 
that  by  a  transaction  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  a  certain 
number  of  persons  called  "  the  elect,"  were  given  to  Christ,  and  in 
process  of  time  "  drawn"  to  him  by  the  Father ;  and  that  as  none 
can  be  saved  but  those  thus  "  given"  to  him,  and  "  drawn"  by  the 
Father,  the  doctrine  of  "  distinguishing  grace"  is  established ;  and 
the  rest  of  mankind,  not  having  been  given  by  the  Father  to  the 
Son,  can  have  no  saving  participation  in  the  benefits  of  a  redemp- 
tion, which  did  not  extend  to  them.  This  fiction  has  often  been 
defended  with  much  ingenuity  ;  but  it  remains  a  fiction  still  unsup- 
ported by  any  good  interpretation  of  the  texts  which  have  been 
assumed  as  its  foundation. 

1.  The  first  objection  to  the  view  usually  taken  by  Calvinists  of 
this  text,  is,  that  in  the  case  of  the  perverse  Jews,  with  whom  the 
discourse  of  Christ  was  held,  it  places  the  reason  of  their  not 
"  coming"  to  Christ,  in  their  not  having  been  "given"  to  him  by  the 
Father;  whereas  our  Lord,  on  the  contrary,  places  it  in  them- 
selves, and  shows  that  he  considered  their  case  to  be  in  their  own 
hands  by  his  inviting  them  to  come  to  him,  and  reproving  them 
because  they  would  not  come.  "  Ye  have  not  his  word  (the  word 
of  the  Father)  .abiding  in  you  ;  for  whom  he  hath  sent,  him  ye  be* 


88  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

lieve  not,"  John  v,  38.  "  And  ye  will  not  come  to  me  that  ye  may 
have  life,"  verse  40.  "  How  can  ye  believe,  which  receive  honour 
one  of  another,"  verse  44.  "  For  had  ye  believed  Moses,  ye  would 
have  believed  me,  for  he  wrote  of  me,"  verse  46.  Now  these 
statements  cannot  stand  together ;  for  if  the  true  reason  why  the 
perverse  Jews  did  not  believe  in  our  Lord  was,  that  they  had  not 
been  given  to  him  of  the  Father,  then  it  lay  not  in  themselves ;  but 
if  the  reason  was  that  "his  word  did  not  abide  in  them,"  that  they 
"  would  not  come  to  him  ;"  that  they  sought  worldly  "  honour  ;" 
finally,  that  they  believed  not  Moses's  writings  ;  then  it  is  altogether 
contradictory  to  these  declarations,  to  place  it  in  an  act  of  God ;  to 
which  it  is  not  attributed  in  any  part  of  the  discourse. 

2.  To  be  "  given"  by  the  Father  to  Christ,  is  a  phrase  abundantly 
explained  in  the  context  which  this  class  of  interpreters  generally 
overlook. 

It  had  a  special  application  to  those  pious  Jews,  who  "  waited 
for  redemption  at  Jerusalem :"  those  who  read  and  believed  the 
writings  of  Moses,  (a  general  term  it  would  seem  for  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures,)  and  who  were  thus  prepared,  by  more  spiritual 
views  than  the  rest,  though  they  were  not  unmixed  with  obscurity, 
to  receive  Christ  as  the  Messiah.  Of  this  description  were  Peter, 
Andrew,  Philip,  Nathanael,  Lazarus  and  his  sisters,  and  many 
others.  Philip  says  to  Nathanael,  "  We  have  found  him  of  whom 
Moses  in  the  law  and  the  prophets,  did  write ;"  and  Nathanael  was 
manifestly  a  pious  Jew ;  for  our  Lord  said  of  him,  "  Behold  an 
Israelite  indeed,  in  whom  is  no  guile."  The  light  which  such  honest 
inquirers  into  the  meaning  of  the  Scriptures  obtained  as  to  the 
import  of  their  testimony  concerning  the  Messiah,  and  the  character 
and  claims  of  Jesus,  is  expressly  attributed  to  the  teaching  and 
revelation  of  "  the  Father."  So,  after  Peter's  confession,  our 
Lord  exclaimed,  "  Blessed  art  thou  Simon  Bar  Jonah,  for  flesh  and 
blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee ;  but  my  Father  which  is  in 
heaven."  This  teaching,  and  its  influence  upon  the  mind  is,  in 
John  vi,  44,  called  the  "  drawing"  of  the  Father,  "  No  man  can 
come  to  me,  except  the  Father  draw  him  ;"  for,  that  " to  draw" 
and  " to  teach"  mean  the  same  thing,  is  evident,  since  our  Lord 
immediately  adds,  fc  it  is  written  in  the  prophets,  and  they  shall  be 
all  taught  of  God ;"  and  then  subjoins  this  exegetical  observation  : 
— "  every  man,  therefore,  that  hath  heard,  and  hath  learned  of  the. 
Father,  cometh  to  me."  Those  who  truly  "  believed"  Moses's 
words,  then,  were  under  the  Father's  illuminating  influence,  "  heard 
and  learned  of  the  Father  ;"  were  "  drawn"  of  the  Father ;  and  so, 
bv  the  Father,  were  "  given  to  Christ,"  as  his  disciples,  to  be  more 


SECOND.  J  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTE^.  ^0 

fully  taught  the  mysteries  of  his  religion,  and  to  be  made  the  saving 
partakers  of  its  benefits  ; — for  "  this  is  the  Father's  will  which  sent 
me,  that  of  all  which  he  hath  given  me  (thus  to  perfect  in  know- 
ledge, and  to  exalt  into  holiness)  I  should  lose  nothing  ;  but  should 
raise  it  up  again  at  the  last  day."  Thus  we  have  exhibited  that 
beautiful  process  in  the  work  of  God  in  the  hearts  of  sincere  Jews, 
which  took  place  in  their  transit  from  one  dispensation  to  another, 
from  Moses  to  Christ.  Taught  of  the  Father ;  led  into  the  sincere 
belief,  and  general  spiritual  understanding  of  the  Scriptures  as  to 
the  Messiah ;  when  Christ  appeared,  they  were  "  drawn"  and 
"  given"  to  him,  as  the  now  visible  and  accredited  Head,  Teacher, 
Lord,  and  Saviour  of  the  church.  All  in  this  view  is  natural, 
explicit,  and  supported  by  the  context ;  all  in  the  Calvinistic  inter- 
pretation appears  forced,  obscure,  and  inapplicable  to  the  whole 
tenor  of  the  discourse.  For  to  what  end  of  edification  of  any  kind, 
were  the  Jews  told  that  none  but  a  certain  number,  elected  from 
eternity,  and  given  to  him  before  the  world  was  by  the  Father, 
should  come  to  him  ;  and  that  they  to  whom  he  was  then  speaking 
were  not  of  that  number  1  But  the  coherence  of  the  discourse  is 
manifest,  when,  in  these  sermons  of  our  Lord,  they  were  told  that 
their  not  coming  to  Christ  was  the  proof  of  their  unbelief  in  Moses's 
writings  ;  that  they  were  not  "  taught  of  God  ;"  that  they  had 
neither  "  heard  nor  learned  of  the  Father,"  whom  they  yet  professed 
to  worship,  and  seek ;  and  that,  as  the  hinderance  to  their  coming 
to  Christ  was  in  the  state  of  their  hearts,  it  was  remediable  by  a 
diligent  and  honest  search  of  the  Scriptures ;  and  by  listening  to 
the  teachings  of  God.  To  this  very  class  of  Jews  our  Lord,  in  this 
same  discourse,  says,  "  Search  the  Scriptures  ;"  but  to  what  end 
were  they  to  do  this,  if,  in  the  Calvinistic  sense,  they  were  not  given 
to  him  of  the  Father  ?  The  text  in  question,  then,  thus  opened  by 
a  reference  to  the  whole  discourse,  is  of  obvious  meaning.  "  All 
that  the  Father  giveth  me  after  this  preparing  teaching,  shall  or  icill 
come  to  me  ;  (for  it  is  simply  the  future  tense  of  the  indicative  mood 
which  is  used  ;  and  no  notion  of  irresistible  influence  is  conveyed  ;) 
and  him  that  cometh  to  me,  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out."  The  latter 
clause  is  added  to  show  the  perfect  harmony  of  design  between 
Christ  and  the  Father,  a  point  often  adverted  to  in  this  discourse  : 
for  "  I  came  down  from  heaven,  not  to  do  mine  own  will,  but  the 
Avill  of  him  that  sent  me."  Whom,  therefore,  the  Father  so  gives,  1 
receive  :  I  enter  upon  my  assigned  office,  and  shall  be  faithful  to  it. 
In  reference  also  to  the  work  of  God  in  the  hearts  of  men  in  gene*- 
ral,  as  well  as  to  the  honest  and  inquiring  Jews  of  our  Lord's  da) , 
these  passages  have  a  clear  and  intercstina;  application.  The  work 
Vol.  Ill  12 


90  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

of  the  Father  is  carried  on  by  his  convincing  and  teaching  Spirit ; 
but  that  Spirit  "  testifies"  of  Christ,  "  leads"  to  Christ,  and  "  gives" 
to  Christ,  that  we  may  receive  the  full  benefit  of  his  sacrifice  and 
salvation,  and  be  placed  in  the  church  of  which  he  is  the  Head. 
But  in  this  there  is  no  exclusion.  That  which  hinders  others  from 
coming  to  Christ,  is  that  which  hinders  them  from  being  "  draAvn" 
of  the  Father ;  from  "  hearing  and  learning"  of  the  Father,  in  his 
holy  word,  and  by  his  Spirit ;  which  hindrance  is  the  moral  state 
of  the  heart,  not  any  exclusive  decree  ;  not  the  want  of  teaching, 
or  drawing ;  but,  as  it  is  compendiously  expressed  in  Scripture,  a 
"resisting  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

Matt,  xx,  .15,  16,  "  Is  it  not  lawful  for  me  to  do  what  I  will  with 
my  own  ]  Is  thine  eye  evil  because  I  am  good  ?  So  the  last  shall  be 
iirst,  and  the  first  last ;  for  many  are  called  but  few  chosen." 

This  passage  has  been  often  urged  in  proof  of  the  doctrine  of 
unconditional  election ;  and  the  argument  raised  upon  it  is,  that. 
God  has  a  right  to  dispense  grace  and  glory  to  whom  he  will,  on  a 
principle  of  pure  sovereignty  ;  and  to  leave  others  to  perish  in  their 
sins.  That  the  passage  has  no  relation  to  this  doctrine,  needs  no 
other wproof  than  that  it  is  the  conclusion  of  the  parable  of  the 
labourers  in  the  vineyard.  The  householder  givesto  them  that 
"  wrought  but  one  hour"  an  equal  reward  to  that  bestowed  upon 
those  who  had  laboured  through  the  twelve.  The  latter  received 
the  full  price  of  the  day's  labour  agreed  upon ;  and  the  former  were 
made  subjects  of  a  special  and  sovereign  dispensation  of  grace. 
The  exercise  of  the  Divine  sovereignty,  in  bestowing  degrees  of 
grace,  or  reward,  is  the  subject  of  the  parable,  and  no  one  disputes 
it ;  but,  according  to  the  Calvinistic  interpretation,  no  grace  at  all, 
no  reward,  is  bestowed  upon  the  non-elect,  who  are,  moreover, 
punished  for  rejecting  a  grace  never  offered.  The  absurdity  of 
such  a  use  of  the  parable  is  obvious.  It  relates  to  no  such  subject ; 
for  its  moral  manifestly  relates  to  the  reception  of  great  offenders, 
and  especially  of  the  Gentiles,  into  the  favour  of  Christ,  and  the- 
abundant  rewards  of  Heaven. 

2  Timothy  ii,  19,  "Nevertheless  the  foundation  of  God  standeth 
sure,  having  this  seal,  The  Lord  knoweth  them  that  are  his  ;  and, 
Let  every  one  that  nameth  the  name  of  Christ  depart  from  iniquity." 
The  apostle,  in  this  chapter,  is  speaking  of  those  ancient  heretics 
who  affirmed  "  that  the  resurrection  is  past  already,  and  overthrew 
the  faith  of  some."  What  then  1  the  truth  itself  is  not  overthrown  ; 
the  foundation  of  God  standeth  sure,  having  this  seal,  or  inscription, 
"  The  Lord  knoweth,"  or  appro veth,  or,  if  it  please  better,  distin- 
e^vishes  and  acknowledges  "  them  that  are  his ;"  and,  "  Let  every 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  t)l 

one  that  nameth  the  name  of  Christ  depart  from  iniquity  ;'*  which 
is  as  much  as  to  say  that  none  are  truly  "  the  Lord's"  who  do  not 
depart  from  iniquity  ;  and  that  those  whose  faith  is  "  overthrown" 
by  the  influence  of  corrupt  principles  and  manners,  are  no  longer 
accounted  "  his  :"  all  which  is  perfectly  congruous  with  the  opin- 
ions of  those  who  hold  the  unrestricted  extent  of  the  death  of  Christ. 
Towards  the  Calvinistic  doctrine,  this  text  certainly  bears  no  friendly 
aspect ;  for  surely  it  was  of  little  consequence  to  any,  to  have  their 
"  faith  overthrown,"  if  that  faith  never  was,  nor  could  be,  connected 
with  salvation. 

John  x,  26,  "  But  ye  believe  not,  because  ye  are  not  of  my  sheep, 
as  I  said  unto  you." 

The  argument  here  is,  that  the  cause  of  the  unbelief  of  the  per- 
sons addressed  was,  that  they  were  not  of  the  number  given  to 
Christ  by  the  Father,  from  eternity,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  Others.  (30) 
Let  it,  however,  be  observed,  that  in  direct  opposition  to  this,  men 
are  called  the  sheep  of  Christ  by  our  Lord  himself,  not  with  refer- 
ence to  any  supposed  transaction  between  the  Father  and  the  Son 
in  eternity,  which  is  never  even  hinted  at,  but  because  of  their 
qualities  and  acts.  "  My  sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  I  know  them  ; 
and  they  follow  me."  "  A  stranger  will  they  not  follow."  Why 
then  did  not  the  Jews  believe  1  Because  they  had  not  the  qualities 
of  Christ's  sheep  :  they  were  neither  discriminating  as  to  the  voice 
of  the  shepherd,  nor  obedient  to  it.  The  usual  Calvinistic  interpret- 
ation brings  in  our  Lord,  in  this  instance,  as  teaching  the  Jews  thai; 
the  reason  why  they  did  not  believe  on  him,  was,  that  they  could 
not  believe  !  for,  as  Mr.  Scott  says  in  the  note  below,  "  not  being 
of  that  chosen  remnant,  they  were  left  to  the  pride  and  enmity  ol 
their  carnal  hearts."  This  was  not  likely  to  be  very  edifying  to 
them.  But  the  words  of  our  Lord  are  manifestly  words  of  reproof, 
grounded,  not  upon  acts  of  God,  but  upon  acts  of  their  own ;  and 
they  are  parallel  to  the  passages — "  If  God  were  your  Father,  ye 
would  love  me,"  chap,  viii,  42.  "  Every  one  that  is  of  the  truth 
heareth  my  voice,"  xviii,  37.  "  How  can  ye  believe,  which  receive 
honour  one  of  another,"  v,  44. 

John  xiii,  18,  "I  speak  not  of  you  all:  I  know  whom  I  have 
chosen  :  but  that  the  Scripture  may  be  fulfilled,  He  that  cateth 
bread  with  me  hath  lifted  up  his  heel  against  inc." 

"  He  perfectly  knew,"  says  Mr.  Scott  on  the  passage,  "  what 

(3)  "  The  true  reason  why  they  did  not  believe  was,  the  want  of  that  eimplc, 
teachable,  and  inoffensive  temper,  which  characterized  his  sheep,  fok  not  being 
of  that  chosen  remnant,  they  were  left,  to  the  prido  and  enmity  of  their  c'aTn?T 
".•■r>rt>-  "-,-SeoTT's  Com- 


92  THEOLOGICAL  flNSTTT  U'fES.  [PART 

persons  he  had  chosen,  as  well  as  which  of  them  were  chosen  unto 
salvation."  This  is  surely  making  our  Lord  utter  a  very  unmean- 
ing truism  ;  for  as  he  chose  the  apostles,  so  he  must  have  "  knowrC 
that  he  chose  them.  Dr.  Whitby's  interpretation  is,  therefore,  to 
"be  taken  in  preference.  "  I  know  the  temper  and  disposition  of 
those  whom  I  have  chosen,  and  what  I  may  expect  from  every  one 
of  them  ;  for  which  case  I  said,  '  Ye  are  not  all  clean  ;'  but  God  in 
his  wisdom  hath  permitted  this,  that  as  Ahithophel  betrayed  David, 
though  he  was  his  familiar  friend,  so  Judas,  my  familiar  at  my  table, 
might  betray  the  Son  of  God ;  and  so  the  words  recorded,  Psalms 
xli,  9,  might  be  fulfilled  in  him  also  of  whom  king  David  was  the 
type."(4)  Certainly  Judas  was  "chosen"  as  well  as  the  rest 
"  Have  not  I  chosen  you  ticelve,  and  one  of  you  is  a  devil  1"  nor  have 
we  any  reason  to  conclude  that  Christ  uses  the  term  chosen  differ- 
ently in  the  two  passages.  When,  therefore,  our  Lord  says,  "  I 
know  whom  I  have  chosen,"  the  term  know  must  be  taken  in  the 
sense  of  discriminating  character. 

John  xv,  1 6,  "  Ye  have  not  chosen  me,  but  I  have  chosen  you, 
and  ordained  you,  that  ye  should  go  and  bring  forth  fruit."  Mr. 
Scott,  whom,  as  being  a  modern  Calvinistic  commentator,  we  rather 
choose  again  to  quote,  interprets — "  chosen  them  unto  salvation." 
In  its  proper  sense,  we  make  no  objection  to  this  phrase :  it  is  a 
scriptural  one  ;  but  it  must  be  taken  in  its  own  connexion.  Here, 
however,  either  the  term  "  chosen"  is  to  be  understood  with  refer- 
ence to  the  apostolic  office,  which  is  very  agreeable  to  the  context ; 
or  if  it  relate  to  the  salvation  of  the  disciples,  it  can  have  no  respect 
to  the  doctrine  of  eternal  election.  For  if  the  election  spoken  of 
were  not  an  act  done  in  time,  it  would  have  been  unnecessary  for 
our  Lord,  to  say  "  Ye  have  not  chosen  me ;"  because  it  is  obvious 
they  could  not  choose  him  before  they  came  into  being.  Another 
passage  also,  in  the  same  discourse,  farther  proves,  that  the  election 
mentioned  was  an  act  done  in  time.  "  I  have  chosen  you  out  of  the 
world,"  ver.  1 9.  But  if  they  were  "  chosen  out  of  the  world,"  they 
Were  chosen  subsequently  to  their  being  "  in  the  world ;"  and, 
therefore,  the  election  spoken  of  is  not  eternal.  The  last  observa- 
tion will  also  deprive  these  interpreters  of  another  favourite  pas- 
sage, "  Those  that  thou  gavest  me  I  have  kept,  and  none  of  them 
is  lost,  but  the  son  of  perdition."  The  "  giving"  here  mentioned, 
was  no  more  an  act  of  God  in  eternity,  as  they  pretend,  than  the 
"  choosing"  to  which  we  have  already  referred ;  for  in  the  same 
discourse  the  apostles  are  called  "  the  men  thou  gavest  me  out  oftlie 
irorld"  and  were  therefore  given  to  Christ  in  time.    The  exception 

(4)  Notes  in  loc  - 


SECOND. j  THEOLOGICAL  iNgfirUTESj  !'-' 

as  to  Judas,  also,  proves  that  this  "  giving"  expresses  actual  disci- 
pleship.  Judas  had  been  "  given"  as  well  as  the  rest,  or  he  could 
not  have  been  mentioned  as  an  exception ;  that  is,  he  had  been 
once  "found"  or  he  could  not  have  been  " lost."  2  Tim.  i,  9, 
"Who  hath  saved  us,  and  called  us  with  a  holy  calling,  not  accord- 
ing to  our  works,  but  according  to  his  own  purpose  and  grace, 
which  was  given  us  in  Christ  Jesus  before  the  world  began."" 

Mr.  Scott  here  contends  for  the  doctrine  of  the  personal  election 
of  the  persons  spoken  of,  "  from  the  beginning,  or  before  eternal 
ages,"  which  is  the  most  literal  translation ;  and  argues  that  this 
cannot  be  denied,  without  supposing  "that  all  who  live  and  die 
impenitent,  may  be  said  to  be  saved,  and  called  with  a  holy  calling  ; 
because  a  Saviour  was  promised  from  the  beginning  of  the  world.'-' 
"  Indeed,"  he  adds,  "  the  purpose  of  God  is  mentioned  as  the  rea- 
son why  they,  rather  than  others,  were  saved  and  called."  We  shall 
see  the  passage  in  a  very  different  light,  if  we  attend  to  the  follow- 
ing considerations. 

"The  purpose  and  grace,"  or  gracious  purpose,  "which  was 
given  us  in  Christ  Jesus  before  the  world  began,"  is  represented  as 
having  been  "  hid  in  past  ages  ;"  for  the  apostle  immediately  adds, 
"  but  is  now  made  manifest  by  the  appearing  of  our  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ."  It  cannot  be  the  personal  election  of  believers,  therefore, 
of  which  the  apostle  here  speaks  ;  because  it  was  saying  nothing  to 
declare  that  the  Divine  purpose  to  elect  them  was  not  manifest  in 
former  ages  ;  but  was  reserved  to  the  appearing  of  Christ.  What- 
ever degree  of  manifestation  God's  purpose  of  personal  election  as 
to  individuals  receives,  even  the  Calvinists  acknowledge  that  it  is 
made  obvious  only  by  the  personal  moral  changes  which  take  place 
in  them  through  their  "  effectual  calling,"  faith,  and  regeneration. 
Till  the  individual,  therefore,  comes  into  being,  God's  purpose  to  elect 
him  cannot  be  manifested  ;  and  those  who  were  so  selected,  but  did 
not  live  till  Christ  appeared,  could  not  have  their  election  manifested 
before  he  appeared.  Again,  if  personal  election  be  intended  in  the 
text,  and  calling  and  conversion  are  the  proofs  of  personal  election., 
then  it  is  not  true  that  the  election  of  individuals  to  eternal  life,  was 
kept  hid  until  the  appearing  of  Christ ;  for  every  true  conversion, 
in  any  former  age,  was  as  much  a  manifestation  of  personal  elec- 
tion, that  is  of  the  peculiar  favour  and  "  distinguishing  grace"  of 
God,  as  it  is  under  the  Gospel.  A  parallel  passage  in  the  Epistle. 
to  the  Ephesians,  chap,  iii,  4-6,  will,  however,  explain  that  before 
us.  "Whereby,  when  ye  read,  ye  may  understand  my  knowledge 
in  the  mystery  of  Christ,  which  in  other  ages  was  not  made  known 
unto  the  sons  of  men,  as  it  is  now  revealed  unto  the  holy  apostles 


94  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  prophets  by  the  Spirit;  that  the  Gentiles  should  be  fellow  heirs, 
and  of  the  same  body,  and  partakers  of  his  promise  in  Christ  by  the 
Gospel :"  and  in  ver.  11,  this  is  called,  in  exact  conformity  to  the 
phrase  used  in  the  Epistle  to  Timothy,  "  the  eternal  purpose  which 
he  purposed  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord."  The  "  purpose,"  or  "  gra- 
cious purpose,"  mentioned  in  both  places,  as  formerly  hidden,  but 
"  now  manifested,"  was  therefore  the  purpose  to  form  one  universal 
church  of  believing  Jews  and  Gentiles  ;  and  in  the  text  before  us, 
the  apostle,  speaking  in  the  name  of  all  his  fellow  Christians, 
whether  Jews  or  Gentiles,  says  that  they  were  saved  and  called 
according  to  that  previous  purpose  and  plan — "  who  hath  saved  us 
and  called  us,"  &c.  The  reason  why  the  apostle  Paul  so  often  refers 
to  "  this  eternal  purpose"  of  God,  is  to  justify  and  confirm  his  own 
ministry  as  a  teacher  of  the  Gentiles,  and  an  assertor  of  their  equal 
spiritual  rights  with  the  Jews ;  and  that  this  subject  was  present  to 
his  mind  when  he  wrote  this  passage,  and  not  an  eternal  personal 
election,  is  manifest  from  verse  11,  which  is  a  part  of  the  same 
paragraph,  (i  whereunto  I  am  appointed  a  preacher,  and  an  apostle, 
and  a  teacher  of  the  Gentiles." 

But,  says  Mr.  Scott,  "  all  who  live  and  die  impenitent,  may  then 
be  said  to  be  'saved,  and  called  with  a  holy  calling,'  because  a 
Saviour  was  promised  from  the.  beginning  of  the  world."  But  we 
do  not  say  that  any  are  saved  only  because  a  Saviour  was  promised 
from  the  beginning  of  the  world  ;  but  that  the  apostle  simply  affirms- 
that  the  salvation  of  believers,  whether  Gentiles  or  Jews,  and  the 
means  of  that  salvation,  were  the  consequences  of  God's  previous 
purpose,  before  the  world  began.  All  who  are  actually  saved, 
may  say,  "  We  are  saved"  according  to  this  purpose  ;  but  if  then- 
actual  salvation  shut  out  the  salvation  of  all  others,  then  no  more 
have  been  saved  than  those  included  by  the  apostle  in  the  pronoun 
"  us,"  which  would  prove  too  much.  But  Mr.  Scott  tells  us  that 
"  '  the  purpose  of  God'  is  mentioned  as  the  reason  why  they,  rather 
than  others,  were  thus  saved  and  called."  It  is  mentioned  with  no 
such  view.  The  purpose  of  God  is  introduced  by  the  apostle  as  his 
authority  for  making  to  "  the  Gentiles"  the  offer  of  salvation  ;  and 
. .  as  a  motive  to  induce  Timothy  to  prosecute  the  same  glorious  work,, 
after  his  decease.  This  is  obviously  the  scope  of  the  whole  chapter. 
Acts  xiii,  48,  "  And  as  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life 
believed."  Mr,  Scott  is  somewhat  less  confident  than  some  others 
as  to  the  support  which  the  Calvinistic  system  is  thought  to  derive, 
from  the  word  rendered  ordained.  He,  however,  attempts  to  leave 
the  impression  upon  the  minds  of  his  readers,  that  it  means.  "  ap- 
pointed to  eternal  lifi  ■-" 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  !,-'» 

We  may,  however,  observe, 

1.  That  the  persons  here  spoken  of  were  the  Gentiles  to  whom  the 
apostles  preached  the  Gospel,  upon  the  Jews  of  the  same  piace 
"putting  it  from  iiem,"  and  "judging"  or  proving  "themselves 
unworthy  of  eternal  life."  But  if  the  only  reason  why  the  Gentiles 
believed  was,  that  they  were  "  ordained,"  in  the  sense  of  personal 
predestination,  to  eternal  life  ;"  then  the  reason  why  the  Jews 
believed  not  was  the  want  of  such  a  predestinating  act  of  God,  and 
not,  as  it  is  affirmed,  an  act  of  their  own — the  putting  it  away 
from  them. 

2.  This  interpretation  supposes  that  all  the  elect  Gentiles  at 
Antioch  believed  at  that  time  ;  and  that  no  more,  at  least  of  full 
age,  remained  to  believe.  This  is  rather  difficult  to  admit;  and  there- 
fore Mr.  Scott  says,  "  though  it  is  probable  that  all  who  were  thus 
affected  at  first,  did  not  at  that  time  believe  unto  salvation ;  yet 
many  did."  But  this  is  not  according  to  the  text,  which  says 
expressly,  "  as  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life  believed  :"  so 
that  such  commentators  must  take  this  inconvenient  circumstance 
along  with  their  interpretation,  that  all  the  elect  at  Antioch  were, 
at  that  moment,  brought  into  Christ's  church. 

3.  Even  some  Calvinists,  not  thinking  that  it  is  the  practice  of 
the  apostles  and  evangelists  to  lift  up  the  veil  of  the  decrees  so  high 
as  this  interpretation  supposes,  choose  to  render  the  words — "  as 
many  as  were  determined"  or  "  ordered"  for  eternal  life. 

4.  But  we  may  finally  observe,  that,  in  no  place  in  the  New 
Testament,  in  which  the  same  word  occurs,  is  it. ever  employed  to 
convey  the  meaning  of  destiny,  or  predestination :  a  consideration 
which  is  fatal  to  the  argument  which  has  been  drawn  from  it.  The 
following  are  the  only  instances  of  its  occurrence  :  Matt,  xxviii,  1 6, 
"  Then  the  eleven  disciples  went  away  into  Galilee,  into  a  mountain 
where  Jesus  had  appointed  them."  Here  the  word  means  com- 
manded, or  at  most  agreed  upon  beforehand,  and  certainly  conveys 
no  idea  of  destiny.  Luke  vii,  8,  "  For  I  also  am  a  man  set  under 
authority."  Here  the  word  means  "placed,  or  disposed."  Acts 
xv,  2,  "  They  determined  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  should  go  up  to 
Jerusalem."  Here  it  signifies  mutual  agreement  and  decision. 
Acts  xxii,  10,  "Arise,  and  go  into  Damascus;  and  there  it  shall 
be  told  thee  of  all  things  which  are  appointed  for  thee  to  do." 
Here  it  means  committed  to,  or  appointed  in  the  way  of  injunction ; 
but  no  idea  of  destiny  is  conveyed.  Acts  xxviii,  23,  "  And  when 
they  had  appointed  him  a  day,"  when  they  had  fixed  upon  a  day  by 
mutual  agreement ;  for  St.  Paul  was  not  under  the  command  or 
control  of  the  visiters  who  came  to  him  to  hear  his  doctrine.  Rom. 


96  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PAET 

xiii,  1,  "The  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God:"  clearly  signi- 
fying constituted  and  ordered.  1  Cor.  xvi,  15,  "They have  addicted 
themselves  to  the  ministry  of  the  saints  :"  here  it  can  mean  nothing 
else  than  applied,  devoted  themselves  to.  Thus  the  word  never 
takes  the  sense  of  predestination ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  when  St. 
Luke  wishes  to  convey  that  notion,  he  combines  it  with  a  preposi- 
tion, and  uses  a  compound  verb — "  and  hath  determined  the  times 
before  appointed."  This  was  pre-ordination,  and  he  therefore  so 
terms  it ;  but  in  the  text  in  question  he  speaks  not  of  pre-ordina- 
tion, but  of  ordination  simply.  The  word  employed  signifies,  "  to 
place,  order,  appoint,  dispose,  determine,"  and  is  very  variously 
applied.  The  prevalent  idea  is  that  of  settlings  ordering,  and  re- 
solving ;  and  the  meaning  of  the  text  is,  that  as  many  as  were 
fixed  and  resolved  upon  eternal  life,  as  many  as  were  careful  about, 
and  determined  on  salvation,  believed.  For  that  the  historian  is- 
speaking  of  the  candid  and  serious  part  of  the  hearers  of  the  apostles, 
in  opposition  to  the  blaspheming  Jews  ;  that  is,  of  those  Gentiles- 
"  who,  when  they  heard  this,  were  glad,  and  glorified  the  word  of 
the  Lord,"  is  evident  from  the  context.  The  persons  who  then 
believed,  appear  to  have  been  under  a  previous  preparation  for 
receiving  the  Gospel ;  and  were  probably  religious  proselytes 
associating  with  the  Jews. 

Luke  x,  20,  "  But  rather  rejoice,  because  your  names  are  written 
in  heaven."  The  inference  from  this  text  is,  that  there  is  a  register 
of  all  the  elect  in  the  "  book  of  life,"  and  that  their  number,  ac- 
cording to  the  doctrine  of  the  Synod  of  Dort,  is  fixed  and  determi- 
nate. Our  Calvinistic  friends  forget,  however,  that  names  may  be 
"  blotted  out  of  the  book  of  life  :"  and  so  the  theory  falls. — "  And 
if  any  man  shall  take  away  from  the  words  of  the  book  of  this 
prophecy,  God  shall  take  away  his  part  out  of  the  book  of  life." 

Prov.  xvi,  4,  "The  Lord  hath  made  all  things  for  himself;  yea, 
even  the  wicked  for  the  day  of  evil."  If  there  be  any  relevance  in 
this  passage  to  the  Calvinistic  theory,  it  must  be  taken  in  the 
supralapsarian  sense,  that  the  final  cause  of  the  creation  of  the 
wicked  is  their  eternal  punishment.  It  follows  from  this,  that  sin 
Is  not  the  cause  of  punishment ;  but  that  this  flows  from  the  mere 
will  of  God  ;  which  is  a  sufficient  refutation.  The  persons  spoken 
of  are  "  wicked."  Either  they  were  made  wicked  by  themselves, 
or  by  God.  If  not  by  God,  then  to  make  the  wicked  for  the  day 
of  evil,  can  only  mean  that  he  renders  them  who  have  made  them- 
selves wicked,  and  remain  incorrigibly  so,  the  instruments  of  glori- 
fying his  justice,  "in  the  day  of  evil,"  that  is,  in  the  day  of  punishment. 
The  Hebrew  phrase,  rendered  literally,  is,  "the  Lord  doth  work  all 


SECOND.']  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  JH 

things  for  himself;"  which  applies  as  well  to  acts  of  government  as 
to  acts  of  creation.  Thus,  then,  we  are  taught  by  the  passage,  not 
that  God  created  the  wicked  to  punish  them,  but  so  governs,  con- 
trols, and  subjects  all  things  to  himself ;  and  so  orders  them  for  the 
accomplishment  of  his  purpose,  that  the  wicked  shall  not  escape 
his  just  displeasure ;  since  upon  such  men  the  day  of  evil  will 
ultimately  come.  It  is  therefore  added  in  the  next  verse,  "  Though 
hand  join  in  hand,  he  shall  not  be  unpunished,"  (5) 

John  xii,  37-40,  "  But  though  he  had  done  so  many  miracles 
before  them,  yet  they  believed  not  on  him  ;  that  the  saying  of  Esaias 
the  prophet  might  be  fulfilled,  which  he  spake,  Lord,  who  hath 
believed  our  report  1  and  to  whom  hath  the  arm  of  the  Lord  been 
revealed]  Therefore  they  could  not  believe,  because  that  Esaias 
said  again,  He  hath  blinded  their  eyes,  and  hardened  their  heart ; 
that  they  should  not  see  with  their  eyes,  nor  understand  with  then- 
heart,  and  be  converted,  and  I  should  heal  them." 

Mr.  Scott's  interpretation  is,  in  its  first  aspect,  more  moderate 
than  that  of  many  divines  of  the  same  school.  It  is — "  they  had 
long  shut  their  own  eyes,  and  hardened  their  own  hearts  ;  and  so 
God  would  give  up  many  of  them  to  such  judicial  blindness,  as 
rendered  their  conversion  and  salvation  impossible.  The  prophecy 
was  not  the  motive  or  cause  of  their  wickedness ;  but  it  was  the 
declaration  of  God's  purpose  which  could  not  be  defeated :  therefore 
whilst  this  prophecy  stood  in  Scripture  against  them,  and  others  of 
like  character,  who  hated  the  truth  from  the  love  of  sin,  the  event 
became  certain ;  in  which  sense  it  is  said,  that  they  could  not  believe." 

That,  in  some  special  and  aggravated  cases,  and  especially  in 
that  which  consisted  in  ascribing  the  miracles  of  Christ  to  Satan, 
and  thus  blaspheming  the  Holy  Ghost;  (cases,  however,  which 
probably  affected  but  a  few  individuals,  and  those  principally  the 
chief  Pharisees  and  Rabbis  of  our  Lord's  time  ;)  there  was  such  a 
judicial  dereliction  as  Mr.  Scott  speaks  of,  is  allowed  ;  but  that  it 
extended  to  the  body  of  the  Jews,  who  at  that  time  did  not  believe 
in  the  mission  and  miracles  of  Christ,  may  be  denied.  The  contrary 
must  appear  from  the  earnest  manner  in  which  their  salvation  was 
sought  by  Christ  and  his  apostles,  subsequently  to  this  declaration  ; 
and  also  from  the  fact  of  great  numbers  of  this  same  people  being 
afterwards  brought  to  acknowledge  and  embrace  Christ  and  his 
religion.    This  is  our  objection  to  the  former  part  of  this  interpreta- 

(5)  Holden  translates  the  verse,  "  Jehovah  hath  made  all  things  for  himself, 
yea,  even  the  wicked  he  daily  sustains;"  and  observes,  "should  the  received 
translation  be  deemed  correct, '  the  day  of  evil'  would  be  considered,  by  a  Jew  of 
the  age  of  Solomon,  to  mean,  the  day  of  trouble  and  affliction." 

Vol.  ITT.  13 


98  THEOLOGICAL  l.\STITUTES.  [PART 

tion.  Not  every  one  who  is  lost  finally,  is  given  up  previously  to 
judicial  blindness.  To  be  thus  abandoned  before  death  is  a  special 
procedure,  which  our  Lord  himself  confines  to  the  special  case  of 
blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  To  the  latter  part  of  the 
comment,  the  objection  is  still  stronger.  Mr.  Scott  acknowledges 
the  wicked  and  wilful  blindness  of  these  Jews  to  be  the  cause  of  the 
judicial  dereliction  supposed.  From  this  it  would  naturally  follow, 
that  this  wilful  blinding,  and  hardening  of  their  hearts,  was  the  true 
reason  why  they  "could  not  believe,"  as  provoking  God  to  take 
away  his  Holy  Spirit  from  them.  But  Mr.  Scott  cannot  stop  here. 
He  will  have  another  cause  for  their  incapacity  to  believe :  not, 
indeed,  the  prophecy  quoted  from  Isaiah  by  the  evangelist ;  but 
"  God's  purpose,"  of  which  that  prediction,  he  says,  was  the 
"declaration."  It  follows,  then,  that  "they  could  not  believe," 
because  it  was  "  God's  purpose  which  could  not  be  defeated."  Agreea- 
bly to  this  Mr.  Scott  understands  the  prediction  as  asserting,  that 
the  agent  in  blinding  the  eyes  of  the  people  reproved,  that  is  the 
obstinate  Jews,  was  God  himself. 

Let  us  now,  therefore,  more  particularly  examine  this  passage, 
and  we  shall  find, 

1 .  That  it  affirms,  not  that  their  eyes  should  be  blinded,  or  their 
ears  closed  by  a  Divine  agency,  as  assumed  by  Mr.  Scott  and  other 
Calvinists.  This  notion  is  not  found  in  Isaiah  vi,  from  which  the 
quotation  is  made.  There  the  agent  is  represented  to  be  the  pro- 
phet himself.  "  Make  the  heart  of  this  people  fat,  and  make  their 
ears  heavy,  and  shut  their  eyes  ;  lest  they  see  with  their  eyes,"  &c. 
Now  as  the  prophet  could  exert  no  secret  direct  influence  over  the 
minds  of  the  disobedient  Jews,  he  must  have  fulfilled  this  commis- 
sion, if  it  be  taken  literally,  by  preaching  to  them  a  fallacious  and 
obdurating  doctrine,  like  that  of  the  false  prophets  ;  but  if,  as  we 
know,  he  preached  no  such  doctrine,  then  are  the  words  to  be  un- 
derstood according  to  the  genius  of  the  Hebrew  language,  which 
often  represents  him  as  an  agent,  who  is  the  occasion,  however 
innocent  and  undesigned,  of  any  thing  being  done  by  another. 
Thus  the  prophet,  in  consequence  of  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  of  his 
day  in  those  promises  of  Messiah  he  was  appointed  to  deliver,  and 
which  led  him  to  complain,  "  Who  hath  believed  our  report !"  be- 
came an  occasion  to  the  Jews  of  "  making  their  own  hearts  fat,  and 
their  ears  heavy,  and  of  shutting  their  eyes"  against  his  testimony. 
The  true  agents  were,  however,  the  Jews  themselves  ;  and  by  all 
who  knew  the  genius  of  the  Hebrew  language,  they  would  be 
understood  as  so  charged  by  the  prophet.  Thus  the  Septuagint, 
the  Arabic,  and  the  Syriac  versions  all  agree  in  rendering  the  text. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  99 

so  that  the  people  themselves,  to  whom  the  prophet  wrote,  are  made 
the  agents  of  doing-  that  which,  in  the  style  of  the  Hebrews,  is 
ascribed  to  the  prophet  himself.  So  also,  it  is  manifest,  that  St. 
Paul,  who  quotes  the  same  Scripture,  Acts  xxviii,  25-27,  under- 
stood the  prophet ;  "  Well  spake  the  Holy  Ghost  by  Esaias  the 
prophet  unto  our  fathers,  saying,  Go  unto  this  people,  and  say, 
Hearing  ye  shall  hear,  and  not  understand  ;  and  seeing  ye  shall  see, 
and  not  perceive  :  for  the  heart  of  this  people  is  waxed  gross,  and 
their  ears  are  dull  of  hearing,  and  their  eyes  have  they  closed;  lest 
they  should  see  with  their  eyes,  and  hear  with  their  ears,  and  under- 
stand with  their  heart,  and  should  be  converted,  and  I  should  heal 
them."  Nor  in  the  passage  as  it  is  given  by  St.  John,  is  the  blind- 
ing of  the  eyes  of  the  Jews  attributed  to  God.  It  stands,  it  is  true, 
in  our  version,  "  He  hath  blinded  thpir  eyes,"  &c.  But  the  Greek 
verbs  have  no  nominative  case  expressed,  and  it  is  left  to  be  sup- 
plied by  the  reader.  Nor  does  the  context  mention  the  agent ;  and 
farther,  if  we  supply  the  pronoun  He,  we  cannot  refer  it  to  God, 
since  the  passage  closes  with  a  change  of  person,  "  and  /  should 
heal  them."  The  agent  blinding  and  hardening,  and  the  agent 
attempting  to  "  heal,"  cannot,  therefore,  be  the  same,  because  they 
are  opposed  to  each  other,  not  only  grammatically,  but  in  design 
and  operation.  That  agent,  then,  may  be  "  the  God  of  this  world," 
to  whom  the  work  of  blinding  them  that  believe  not,  is  expressly 
attributed  by  the  apostle  Paul ;  or  St.  John,  familiar  with  the 
Hebrew  style,  might  refer  it  to  the  prophet,  who  consequentially, 
and  through  the  wilful  perverseness  of  the  Jews,  was  the  occasion 
of  their  making  their  own  "  hearts  gross,  and  closing  their  ears  ;" 
or,  finally,  the  personal  verb  may  be  used  impersonally,  and  the  act- 
ive form  for  the  passive,  of  which  critics  furnish  parallel  instances.  (6) 
But  in  all  these  views  the  true  responsible  agent  and  criminal  doer 
is  "  this  people," — this  perverse  and  obstinate  people  themselves; 
a  point  to  which  every  part  of  their  Scriptures  gives  abundant 
testimony. 

2.  It  may  be  denied  that  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  here  quoted  is, 
as  Mr.  Scott  represents  it,  "  a  declaration  of  God's  purpose,  which 
could  not  be  defeated."  A  simple  prophecy  is  not  a  declaration 
of  purpose  at  all ;  but  the  declaration  of  a  future  event.  If  a 
purpose  of  Goo,  to  be  hereafter  accomplished,  be  declared,  this 
declaration  becomes  more  than  a  simple  prophecy  ;  it  connects  the 
act  with  an  agent ;  and  in  the  case  before  us,  that  agent  is  assumed 
to  be  God.  But  we  have  shown,  that  the  agent  in  blinding  the 
eyes,  and  closing  the  ears  of  these  perverse  Jews,  is  no  where  said 

(CA  See  Whitby'?  Paraphrase  and  Annot.  and  hi"  Dis.  on  the  Five  Points,  eh   i. 


100  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

to  be  God  ;  and  therefore  the  prophecy  is  not  a  declaration  of  his 
purpose.  Again,  if  it  were  a  declaration  of  God's  purpose,  it  would 
not  follow  that  it  could  not  be  defeated  :  for  prophetic  threatenings 
are  not  absolute  ;  but  imply  conditions.  This  is  so  far  from  being 
a  mere  assumption,  that  it  is  established  by  the  authority  of  Almighty 
God  himself,  who  declares,  Jer.  xviii,  7,  8,  "  At  what  instant  I  shall 
speak  concerning  a  nation,  to  pluck  up,  and  to  pull  down,  and  to 
destroy  it ;  if  that  nation,  against  whom  I  have  pronounced,  turn 
from  their  evil,  I  will  repent  of  the  evil  that  I  thought  to  do  unto 
them."  Here  we  have  a  prophetic  commination  uttered;  "  at  what 
instant  I  speak'''' — "  that  nation  against  whom  I  have  pronounced." 
We  have  also  the  purpose  in  the  mind  of  God — "the  evil  that  I 
thought ;"  and  yet  this  prediction  might  fail,  and  this  purpose  be 
defeated.  So  in  the  case  of  repentant  Nineveh,  the  predicted 
destruction  failed,  and  the  wrathful  purpose  was  defeated,  without 
any  impeachment  of  the  Divine  attributes  :  on  the  contrary,  they 
were  illustrated  by  this  manifestation  of  the  mingled  justice  and 
grace  of  his  administration.  Mr.  Scott,  like  many  others,  argues 
as  though  the  prediction  of  an  event  gave  certainty  to  it.  But  the 
certainty  or  uncertainty  of  events  is  not  created  by  prophecy. 
Prophecy  results  from  prescience  ;  and  prescience  has  respect  to 
what  will  be,  but  not  necessarily  to  what  must  be.  Of  this,  however, 
more  in  its  proper  place. 

3.  If  this  prophecy  could  be  made  to  bear  all  that  the  Calvinists 
impose  upon  it,  it  would  not  serve  their  purpose.  It  would,  even 
then,  afford  no  proof  of  general  election  and  reprobation,  since  it 
has  an  exclusive  application  to  the  unbelieving  part  of  the  Jewish 
people  only  ;  and  is  never  adduced,  either  by  St.  John  or  by  St. 
Paul,  as  the  ground  of  any  general  doctrine  whatever. 

Jude  4,  "  For  there  are  certain  men  crept  in  unawares,  who 
were  before  of  old  ordained  to  this  condemnation,  ungodly  men,"  &c. 

The  word  which  is  here  rendered  ordained,  is  XitcvuWy  fore-written  ; 
and  the  word  rendered  condemnation,  signifies  legal  punishment,  or 
judgment.  The  passage  means,  therefore,  either  that  the  class  of 
men  spoken  of  had  been  foretold  in  the  Scriptures,  or  that  their 
punishment  had  been  there  formerly  typified,  in  those  examples  of 
ancient  times  of  which  several  are  cited  in  the  following  verses ;  as 
Cain,  Balaam,  Korah,  and  the  cities  of  the  plain.  Mr.  Scott,  there- 
fore, very  well  interprets  the  text,  when  he  says,  "  the  Lord  had 
foreseen  them,  for  they  were  of  old,  registered  to  this  condemnation  : 
many  predictions  had,  from  the  beginning,  been  delivered  to  this 
effect."  But  when  he  adds,  "Nay,  these  predictions  had  been 
extracts,  as  it  were,  from  the  registers  of  Heaven  ;  even  the  secret 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES-  101 

and  eternal  decrees  of  God,  in  which  he  had  determined  to  leave 
them  to  their  pride  and  lusts,  till  they  merited  and  received  this 
condemnation,"  we  may  well  ask  for  the  proof.  All  this  is  mani- 
festly gratuitous ;  brought  to  the  text,  and  not  deduced  from  it ; 
and  is,  therefore,  very  unworthy  of  a  commentator.  The  "  extracts" 
from  the  register  of  God's  decrees,  as  they  are  found  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, contain  no  such  sentiment  as  that  these  abusers  of  the  grace 
of  God,  only  did  that  which  they  could  not  but  do,  in  consequence 
of  having  been  "  left  to  their  pride  and  lusts  ;"  and  excluded  before 
they  were  born  from  the  mercies  of  Christ.  If  this  sentiment  then 
is  not  in  the  "  extracts,"  it  is  not  in  the  original  register  ;  or  else 
something  is  there  which  God,  in  his  own  revealed  word,  has  not 
extracted,  and  respecting  which  the  commentator  must  either  have 
had  some  independent  revelation,  or  have  been  guilty  of  speaking 
very  rashly.  On  the  contrary,  in  the  parallel  passage  in  2  Peter 
ii,  1-3,  where  the  same  class  of  persons  is  certainly  spoken  of,  so 
far  are  they  from  being  represented  as  excluded  from  the  benefits 
of  Christ's  redemption,  that  they  are  charged  with  a  specific  crime, 
which  necessarily  implies  their  participation  in  it,  widi  the  crime  of 
"  denying  the  Lord  that  bought  them." 

1  Cor.  iv,  7,  "  For  who  maketh  thee  to  differ  from  another  V 
The  context  shows  that  the  apostle  was  here  endeavouring  to 
repress  that  ostentation  which  had  arisen  among  many  persons  in 
the  church  of  Corinth,  on  account  of  their  spiritual  gifts  and 
endowments.  This  he  does  by  referring  those  gifts  to  God,  as  the 
sole  giver, — "  for  who  maketh  thee  to  differ  ?"  or  who  confers 
superiority  upon  thee  1  as  the  sense  obviously  is ;  "  and  what  hast 
thou  that  thou  didst  not  receive  V  Mr.  Scott  acknowledges  that 
"  the  apostle  is  here  speaking  more  immediately  of  natural  abilities, 
and  spiritual  gifts  ;  and  not  of  special  and  efficacious  grace."  If 
so,  then  the  passage  has  nothing  to  do  with  this  controversy.  The 
argument  he  however  affirms,  concludes  equally  in  one  case,  as  in 
the  other  ;  and  in  his  sermon  on  election,  he  thus  applies  it :  "  Let 
the  blessings  of  the  Gospel  be  fairly  proposed,  with  solemn  warnings 
and  pressing  invitations,  to  two  men  of  exactly  the  same  character 
and  disposition :  if  they  are  left  to  themselves  in  entirely  similar 
circumstances,  the  effect  must  be  precisely  the  same.  But,  behold, 
while  one  proudly  scorns  and  resents  the  gracious  offer,  the  other 
trembles,  weeps,  prays,  repents,  believes  !  Who  maketh  this  man 
to  differ  from  the  other  1  or  what  hath  he  that  he  hath  not  received  ? 
The  scriptural  answer  to  this  question,  when  properly  understood,, 
decides  the  whole  controversy."(?) 

(7)  Calvin  puts  the  matter  in  much  tiic  same  way  Inst.  Lib.  iii;  C.  24 


Iw2  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

As  this  is  a  favourite  argument,  and  a  popular  dilemma  in  the 
hands  of  the  Calvinists,  and  so  much  is  supposed  to  depend  upon 
its  solution,  we  may  somewhat  particularly  examine  it. 

Instead  of  supposing  the  case  of  two  men  "  of  exactly  the  same 
character  and  disposition,"  why  not  suppose  the  same  man  in  two 
moral  states  1  for  one  man  who  "  proudly  scorns  the  Gospel"  does 
not  more  differ  from  another  who  penitently  receives  it,  than  the 
same  man  who  has  once  scoffingly  rejected,  and  afterwards  meekly 
submitted  to  it,  differs  from  himself;  as  for  instance,  Saul  the 
Pharisee  from  Paul  the  Apostle.  Now  to  account  for  the  case  of 
two  men,  one  receiving  the  Gospel,  and  the  other  rejecting  it,  the 
theory  of  election  is  brought  in ;  but  in  the  case  of  the  one  man  in 
two  different  states,  this  theory  cannot  be  resorted  to.  The  man 
was  elect  from  eternity  ;  he  is  no  outcast  from  the  mercy  of  his 
God,  and  the  redemption  of  his  Saviour,  and  yet,  in  one  period  of 
his  life,  he  proudly  scorns  the  offered  mercy  of  Christ,  at  another 
he  accepts  it.  It  is  clear,  then,  that  the  doctrine  of  election,  simply 
considered  in  itself,  will  not  solve  the  latter  case  ;  and  by  conse- 
quence it  will  not  solve  the  former  :  for  the  mere  fact,  that  one  man 
rejects  the  Gospel  whilst  another  receives  it,  is  no  more  a  proof  of 
the  non-election  of  the  non-recipient,  than  the  fact  of  a  man  now 
rejecting  it,  who  shall  afterwards  receive  it,  is  a  proof  of  his  non- 
election.  The  solution,  then,  must  be  sought  for  in  some  commu- 
nication of  the  grace  of  God,  in  some  inward  operation  upon  the 
heart,  which  is  supposed  to  be  a  consequence  of  election  ;  but  this 
leads  to  another  and  distinct  question.  This  question  is  not,  how- 
ever, the  vincibility  or  invincibility  of  the  grace  of  God,  at  least  not 
in  the  first  instance.  It  is,  in  truth,  whether  there  is  any  operation 
of  the  grace  of  God  in  man  at  all  tending  to  salvation,  in  cases 
where  we  see  the  Gospel  rejected.  Is  the  man  who  rejects  perse- 
veringly,  and  he  who  rejects  but  for  a  lime,  perhaps  a  long  period 
of  his  life,  left  without  any  good  motions  or  assisting  influence  from 
the  grace  of  God,  or  not  1  This  question  seems  to  admit  of  but  one 
of  three  answers.  Either  he  has  no  gracious  assistance  at  all,  to 
dispose  him  to  receive  the  Gospel ;  or  he  has  a  sufficient  influence 
of  grace  so  to  dispose  him  ;  or  that  gracious  influence  is  dispensed 
in  an  insufficient  measure.  If  the  first  answer  be  given,  then  not 
only  are  the  non-elect  left  without  any  visitations  of  grace  through- 
out life  :  but  the  elect  also  are  left  without  them,  until  the  moment 
of  their  effectual  calling.  If  the  second  be  offered  as  the  answer, 
then  both  in  the  case  of  the  non-elect  man  who  finally  rejects 
Christ,  and  that  of  the  elect  man,  who  rejects  him  for  a  great  part 
of  his  life,  the  saving  srrace  of  God  must  be  allowed  so  to  work  as 


SECOmj.J  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  103 

to  be  capable  of  counteraction,  and  effectual  resistance.  It'  this  be 
denied,  then  the  third  answer  must  be  adopted,  and  the  grace  of 
God  must  be  allowed  so  to  influence  as  to  be  designedly  insufficient 
for  the  ends  for  which  it  is  given  ;  that  is,  it  is  given  for  no  saving 
end  at  all,  either  as  to  the  non-elect,  or  as  to  the  elect  all  the  time 
they  remain  in  a  state  of  actual  alienation  from  Christ.  For  if  an 
insufficient  degree  of  grace  is  bestowed,  when  a  sufficient  degree 
might  have  been  imparted,  then  there  must  have  been  a  reason  for 
restraining  the  degree  of  grace  to  an  insufficient  measure  ;  which 
reason  could  only  be,  that  it  might  be  insufficient,  and  therefore  not 
saving.  Now,  two  of  the  three  of  these  positions  are  manifestly 
contrary  to  the  word  of  God.  To  say  that  no  gracious  influence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  operates  upon  the  unconverted,  is  to  take  away 
their  guilt ;  since  they  cannot  be  guilty  of  rejecting  the  Gospel  if 
they  have  no  power  to  embrace  it,  either  from  themselves,  or  by 
impartation,  whilst  yet  the  Scripture  represents  this  as  the  highest 
guilt  of  men.  All  the  exhortations,  and  reproofs,  and  invitations 
of  Scripture,  are,  also,  by  this  doctrine,  turned  into  mockery  and 
delusion ;  and,  finally,  there  can  be  no  such  thing  in  this  case,  as 
*'  resisting  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  as  "  grieving  and  quenching  the 
Spirit ;"  as  "  doing  despite  to  the  Spirit  of  grace,"  either  in  the  case 
of  the  non-elect,  who  are  never  converted,  or  of  the  elect,  before 
conversion :  so  that  the  latter  have  never  been  guilty  of  stubborn- 
ness, and  obstinacy,  and  rebellion,  and  resistance  of  grace  ;  though 
these  are,  by  them,  afterwards,  always  acknowledged  among  their 
sins.  Nor  did  they  ever  feel  any  good  motion,  or  drawing  from  the 
Spirit  of  God,  before  what  they  term  their  effectual  calling  ;  though, 
it  is  presumed,  that  few,  if  any  of  them,  will  deny  this  in  fact. 

If  the  doctrine  that  no  grace  is  imparted  before  conversion  is 
then  contradicted  both  by  Scripture  and  experience,  how  will  the 
case  stand,  as  to  the  intentional  restriction  of  that  grace  to  a  degree 
which  is  insufficient  to  dispose  the  subject  to  the  acceptance  of  the 
Gospel  ]  If  this  view  be  held,  it  must  be  maintained  equally  as  to 
the  elect  before  their  conversion,  and  as  to  the  non-elect.  In  that 
case,  then,  we  have  equal  difficulty  in  accounting  for  the  guilt  of 
man,  as  when  it  is  supposed  that  no  grace  at  all  is  imparted ;  and 
for  the  reproofs,  calls,  and  invitations,  and  threatenings  of  the  word 
of  God.  For  where  lies  the  difference  between  the  absolute  non- 
impartation  of  grace,  and  grace  so  imparted  as  to  be  designedly 
insufficient  for  salvation  1  Plainly  there  is  none,  except  that  we  can 
see  no  end  at  all  for  giving  insufficient  grace  ;  a  circumstance  which 
would  only  serve  to  render  still  more  perplexing  the  principles  and 
practice  of  the  Divine  administration.  It  has  no  end  of  mercy,  and 


M4  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

none  of  justice  ;  nor,  as  far  as  can  be  perceived,  of  wisdcm.  Not 
of  mercy,  for  it  effects  nothing  merciful,  and  designs  not  to  effect  it ; 
not  of  justice,  for  it  places  no  man  under  equitable  responsibility ; 
not  of  wisdom,  for  it  has  no  assignable  end.  The  Scripture  treats 
all  men  to  whom  the  Gospel  is  preached  as  endowed  with  power, 
not  indeed  from  themselves,  but  from  the  grace  of  God,  to  "  turn 
at  his  reproof;"  to  come  at  his  "  call ;"  to  embrace  his  "grace  ;" 
but  they  have  no  capacity  for  any  of  these  acts,  if  either  of  these 
opinions  be  true  :  and  thus  the  word  of  God  is  contradicted.  So 
also  is  experience,  in  both  cases ;  for  there  could  be  no  sense  of 
guilt  for  having  rejected  Christ,  and  grieved  the  Holy  Spirit,  either 
in  the  non-elect  never  converted,  or  in  the  elect  before  conversion, 
if  either  they  had  no  visitations  of  grace  at  all ;  or  if  these  were 
designedly  granted  in  an  insufficient  degree. 

It  follows,  then,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  impartation  of  grace  to 
the  unconverted,  in  a  sufficient  degree  to  enable  them  to  embrace 
the  Gospel,  must  be  admitted  ;  and  with  this  doctrine  comes  in  that 
of  a  power  in  man  to  use,  or  to  spurn  this  heavenly  gift  and  gracious 
assistance  :  in  other  words,  a  power  of  willing  to  come  to  Christ, 
even  when  men  do  not  come  ;  a  power  of  considering  their  ways, 
and  turning  to  the  Lord,  when  they  do  not  consider  them  and  turn 
to  him  ;  a  power  of  praying,  when  they  do  not  pray  ;  and  a  power 
of  believing,  when  they  do  not  believe  :  powers  all  of  grace  ;  all  the 
.  results  of  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  the  heart ;  but  powers  to  be 
exerted  by  man,  since  it  is  man,  and  not  God,  who  wills,  and  turns, 
and  prays,  and  believes,  whilst  the  influence  under  which  this  is 
done  is  from  the  grace  of  God  alone.  This  is  the  doctrine  which 
is  clearly  contained  in  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  "  Work  out  your  own 
salvation  with  fear  and  trembling ;  for  it  is  God  that  worketh  in  you 
both  to  will  and  to  do,  of  his  own  good  pleasure  ;"  where,  not  only 
the  operation  of  God,  but  the  co-operation  of  man,  are  distinctly 
marked ;  and  are  both  held  up  as  necessary  to  the  production  of 
the  grand  result — "  salvation." 

It  will  appear,  then,  from  these  observations,  that  the  question, 
"  Who  maketh  thee  to  differ  ?"  as  urged  by  Mr.  Scott  and  others 
from  the  time  of  Calvin,  is  a  very  inapposite  one  to  their  purpose,  for, 

First,  it  is  a  question  which  the  apostle  asks  with  no  reference 
to  a  difference  in  religious  state,  but  only  with  respect  to  gifts  and 
endowments.  Secondly,  the  Holy  Ghost  gives  no  authority  for 
such  an  application  of  his  words  as  is  thus  made,  in  any  other  part 
of  Scripture.  Thirdly,  it  cannot  be  employed  for  the  purpose  for 
which  it  is  dragged  forth  so  often  from  its  context  and  meaning ; 
for,  in  the  use  thus  made  of  it,  it  is  falselv  assumed,  that  the  two 


• 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  105 

men  instanced,  the  one  who  rejects,  and  the  other  who  embraces 
the  Gospel,  are  not  each  endowed  with  sufficient  grace  to  enable 
them  to  receive  God's  gracious  offer.  Now  this,  we  may  again 
say,  must  either  be  denied  or  affirmed.  If  it  be  affirmed,  then  the 
difference  between  the  two  men  consists,  not  where  they  place  it, 
in  the  destitution  or  deficiency  on  the  one  hand,  or  in  the  plenitude 
on  the  other,  of  the  grace  of  God  :  but  in  the  use  of  grace  :  and 
when  they  say,  "  it  is  God  which  maketh  them  to  differ,"  they  say 
in  fact,  that  it  is  God  that  not  only  gives  sufficient  grace  to  each ; 
but  uses  that  grace  for  them.  For  if  it  be  allowed  that  a  sufficient 
grace  for  repentance  and  faith  is  given  to  each,  then  the  true  differ- 
ence between  them  is,  that  one  repents,  and  the  other  does  not 
repent ;  the  one  believes,  and  the  other  does  not  believe  :  if,  there- 
fore, this  difference  is  to  be  attributed  to  God  directly,  then  the  act 
of  repenting,  and  the  act  of  believing,  are  both  the  acts  of  God.  If 
they  hesitate  to  avow  this,  for  it  is  an  absurdity,  then  either  they 
must  give  up  the  question  as  totally  useless  to  them,  or  else  take  the 
other  side  of  the  alternative,  that  to  all  who  reject  the  Gospel, 
sufficient  grace  to  receive  it  is  not  given.  How  then  will  that  serve 
them?  They  may  say,  it  is  true,  when  they  take  the  man  who 
embraces  the  Gospel,  "  Who  maketh  him  to  differ  but  God,  who 
gives  this  sufficient  grace  to  him  1"  but  then  we  have  an  equal  right 
to  take  the  man  who  rejects  the  Gospel,  and  ask,  "  Who  maketh 
him  to  differ"  from  the  man  that  embraces  it  1  To  this  they  cannot 
reply  that  he  maketh  himself  to  differ  ;  for  that  which  they  here  lay 
down  is,  that  he  has  either  no  grace  at  all  imparted  to  him  to  enable 
him  to  act  as  the  other ;  or,  what  amounts  to  the  same  thing,  no 
sufficient  degree  of  it  to  produce  a  true  faith ;  that  he  never  had 
that  grace ;  that  he  is,  and  always  must  remain,  as  destitute  of  it 
as  when  he  was  born.  He  does  not,  therefore,  make  himself  to 
differ  from  the  man  who  embraces  the  Gospel ;  for  he  has  no  power 
to  imitate  his  example,  and  to  make  himself  equal  with  him ;  and 
the  only  answer  to  our  question  is,  "  that  it  is  God  who  maketh  him 
to  differ  from  the  other,"  by  withholding  that  grace  by  which  alone 
he  could  be  prevented  from  rejecting  the  Gospel ;  and  this,  so  far 
from  "  settling  the  whole  controversy,"  is  the  very  point  in  debate. 

This  dilemma,  then,  will  prove,  when  examined,  but  inconvenient 
to  themselves ;  for  if  sufficiency  of  grace  be  allowed  to  the  un- 
converted, then  the  Calvinists  make  the  acts  of  grace,  as  well  as  the 
gift  of  grace  itself,  to  be  the  work  of  God  in  the  elect :  if  sufficiency 
of  grace  is  denied,  then  the  unbelief  and  condemnation  of  the 
wicked  are  not  from  themselves,  but  from  God.  (8)     The  fact  is, 

(8)  This  Calvin  scruples  not  to  sav,  "  The  supreme  Lord,  therefore,  by  dr 
Vnh.  LIT  U 


1(M>  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PaRT 

that  this  supposed  puzzle  has  been  always  used  ad  captandum ;  and 
is  unworthy  so  grave  a  controversy  ;  and  as  to  the  pretence,  that 
the  admission  of  a  power  in  man  to  use  or  to  abuse  the  grace  of 
God  involves  some  merit  or  ground  of  glorying  in  man  himself,  this 
is  equally  fallacious.  The  power  "  to  will  and  to  do,"  is  the  sole 
result  of  the  working  of  God  in  man.  All  is  of  grace  :  "  By  the 
grace  of  God,"  must  every  one  say,  "  I  am  what  I  am."  Here  is 
no  dispute  ;  every  good  thought,  desire,  and  tendency  of  the  heart, 
and  all  its  power  to  turn  these  to  practical  account  by  prayer,  by 
faith,  by  the  use  of  the  means  of  grace,  through  which  new  power 
"  to  will  and  to  do,"  new  power  to  use  grace,  as  well  as  new  grace, 
is  communicated,  is  of  God.  Every  good  act,  therefore,  is  the  use 
of  a  communicated  power  which  is  given  of  grace,  as  the  stretching 
out  of  the  withered  hand  of  the  healed  man  was  the  use  of  the 
power  communicated  to  his  imbecility,  and  still  ivorking  with  the 
act,  though  not  the  act  itself;  and  to  attempt  to  lay  a  ground  of 
boasting  and  self-sufficiency  in  the  assisted  acceptance  of  the  grace 
of  God  by  us  ;  and  the  empowered  submission  of  our  hearts  to  it,  is 
as  manifestly  absurd  as  it  would  be  to  say,  that  the  man,  whose 
arm  was  withered,  had  great  reason  to  congratulate  himself  on  his 
share  in  the  glory  of  the  miracle,  because  he  himself  stretched  out 
the  invigorated  member  at  the  command  of  Christ ;  and  because  it 
was  not,  in  fact,  lifted  up  by  the  hand  of  him  who,  in  that  act  of 
faith  and  obedience,  had  healed  him. 

The  question  of  the  invincibility  of  Divine  grace,  is  a  point  to  be 
in  another  place  considered. 

Acts  xviii,  9,  10,  "Be  not  afraid,  but  speak,  and  hold  not  thy 
peace ;  for  I  am  with  thee,  and  no  man  shall  set  on  thee  to  hurt 
thee  ;  for  I  have  much  people  in  this  city." 

Mr.  Scott,  to  whom  the  doctrine  of  election  is  always  present, 
says,  "in  this  Christ  evidently  spake  of  those  who  were  his  by  election, 
the  gift  of  the  Father,  and  his  own  purchase  ;  though,  at  that  time, 
in  an  unconverted  state." (9)  It  would  have  been  more  "evident" 
had  this  been  said  by  the  writer  of  the  Acts  as  well  as  by  Mr. 
Scott,  or  any  thing  approaching  to  it.  The  "  evidence,"  we  fear, 
was  all  in  Mr.  Scott's  predisposition  of  mind ;  for  it  no  where  else 
appears.  The  expression  is,  at  least,  capable  of  two  very  satisfac- 
tory interpretations,  independent  of  the  theory  of  Calvinistic  election. 
It  may  mean,  that  there  were  many  well  disposed  and  serious 
inquirers  among  the  "  Greeks"  in  Corinth ;  for  when  Paul  turned 
priving  of  the  communication  of  his  light,  and  leaving  in  darkness  those  whom 
he  has  reprobated,  makes  way  for  the  accomplishment  of  his  own  predestination." 
Inst.  Lib.  iii,  c.  24. 

(9)  Notes  in  lor. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTE.-.  10? 

from  the  Jews,  he  "  entered  into  the  house  of  Justus,  one  that 
worshipped  God.  This  man  was  a  Greek  proselyte ;  and,  from 
various  parts  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  it  is  plain,  that  this  class  ol 
people  were  not  only  numerous,  but  generally  received  the  Gospel 
with  joy,  and  were  among  the  first  who  joined  the  primitive  churches. 
They  manifested  their  readiness  to  receive  the  Gospel  in  Corinth 
itself  when  the  Jews  "  opposed  and  blasphemed ;"  and  it  is  not 
improbable,  that  to  such  proselytes,  who  were  in  many  places,  "  a 
people  prepared  of  the  Lord,"  reference  is  made,  when  our  Saviour, 
speaking  to  Paul  in  this  vision,  says  "  I  have  much  people  in  this 
city."  Suppose,  however,  he  speaks  prospectively  and  prophetic- 
ally, making  his  foreknowledge  of  an  event  the  means  of  encou- 
raging the  labours  of  his  devoted  apostle,  the  doctrine  of  election 
follows  neither  from  the  fact  of  the  foreknowledge  of  God,  nor  from 
prophetic  declarations  grounded  upon  it.  Even  Calvin  founds  not 
election  upon  God's  foreknowledge  ;  but  upon  his  decree. 

A  few  other  passages  might  be  added,  which  are  sometimes 
adduced  as  proofs  of  the  Calvinistic  theory  of  "election"  and 
"  distinguishing  grace  ;"  but  they  are  all  either  explained  by  that 
view  of  scriptural  election  which  has  been  at  large  adduced,  or  are 
of  very  obvious  interpretation.  I  believe  that  I  have  omitted  none, 
on  which  any  great  stress  is  laid  in  the  controversy  ;  and  the  reader 
will  judge  how  far  those  which  have  been  examined  serve  to  support 
those  inferences  which  tend  to  limit  the  universal  import  of  those 
declarations  which  prove,  in  the  literal  sense  of  the  terms,  that  our 
Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  "by  the  grace  of  God,  tasted  death 
for  every  man." 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

Theories  which  limit  the  Extent  of  the  Death  of  Christ. 

We  have,  in  the  foregoing  attempt  to  establish  the  doctrine  of 
the  redemption  of  all  mankind  against  our  Calvinistic  brethren, 
taken  their  scheme  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  usually  understood., 
without  noticing  those  minuter  shades  with  which  the  system  has 
been  varied.  In  this  discussion,  it  is  hoped,  that  no  expression  has 
hitherto  escaped  inconsistent  with  candour.  Doctrinal  truth  would 
be  as  little  served  by  this  as  Christian  charity ;  nor  ought  it  ever  to 
be  forgotten  by  the  theological  inquirer,  that  the  system  which  we 
have  brought  under  review  has,  in  some  of  its  branches,  always 


108  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES-  [PART 

embodied,  and  often  preserved  in  various  parts  of  Christendom,  that 
truth  which  is  vital  to  the  church,  and  salutary  to  the  souls  of  men. 
It  has  numbered,  too,  among  its  votaries,  many  venerable  names  ; 
and  many  devoted  and  holy  men,  whose  writings  often  rank  among 
the  brightest  lights  of  scriptural  criticism  and  practical  divinity.  We 
think  the  peculiarities  of  their  creed  clearly  opposed  to  the  sense  of 
Scripture,  and  fairly  chargeable  in  argument  with  all  those  conse- 
quences we  have  deduced  from  them ;  and  which,  were  it  necessary 
to  the  discussion,  might  be  characterized  in  still  stronger  language. 
Those  consequences,  however,  let  it  be  observed,  we  only  exhibit 
as  logical  ones.  By  many  of  this  class  of  divines  they  are  denied  ; 
by  others  modified ;  and  by  a  third  party  explained  away  to  their 
own  satisfaction  by  means  of  metaphysical  and  subtle  distinctions. 
As  logical  consequences  only  they  are,  therefore,  in  such  cases, 
iairly  to  be  charged  upon  our  opponents,  in  any  disputes  which  may 
arise.  By  keeping  this  distinction  in  view,  the  discussion  of  these 
points  may  be  preserved  unfettered;  and  candour  and  charity 
sustain  no  wound. 

We  shall  now  proceed  to  justify  the  general  view  we  have  taken 
of  the  Calvinistic  doctrine  of  election,  predestination,  and  partial 
redemption,  by  adducing  the  sentiments  of  Calvin  himself,  and  of 
Calvinistic  theologians  and  churches;  after  which,  our  attention 
may  be  directed,  briefly,  to  some  of  those  more  modern  modifica- 
tions of  the  system,  which,  though  they  differ  not,  as  we  think,  so 
materially  from  the  original  model  as  some  of  their  advocates  sup- 
pose, yet  make  concessions  not  unimportant  to  the  more  liberal, 
and,  as  we  believe,  the  only  scriptural  theory. 

Calvin  has  at  large  opened  his  sentiments  on  election,  in  the 
third  book  of  his  Institutes.  (1)"  Predestination  we  call  the  eter- 
nal decree  of  God ;  by  which  he  hath  determined  in  himself  what 
he  would  have  to  become  of  every  individual  of  mankind.  For 
they  are  not  all  created  with  similar  destiny ;  but  eternal  life  is 
foreordained  for  some,  and  eternal  damnation  for  others.  Every 
man,  therefore,  being  created  for  one  or  other  of  these  ends,  we  say, 
he  is  predestinated,  either  to  life,  or  to  death."  After  having  spoken 
of  the  election  of  the  race  of  Abraham,  and  then  of  particular 
branches  of  that  race,  he  proceeds,  "  Though  it  is  sufficiently  clear, 
that  God,  in  his  secret  counsel,  freely  chooses  whom  he  will,  and 
rejects  others,  his  gratuitous  election  is  but  half  displayed  till  we 
come  to  particular  individuals,  to  whom  God  not  only  offers  salva- 
tion, but  assigns  it  in  such  a  manner,  that  the  certainty  of  the  effect 
is  liable  to  no  suspense  or  doubt."  He  sums  up  the  chapter,  in 
(1)  The  following  quotations  are  made  from  Aixfn's  translation.    Lond.  1823 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  101) 

which  he  thus  generally  states  the  doctrine,  in  these  words :  (2) 
"  In  conformity,  therefore,  to  the  clear  doctrine  of  the  Scripture, 
we  assert,  that  by  an  eternal  and  immutable  counsel,  God  hath 
once  for  all  determined  both  whom  he  would  admit  to  salvation, 
and  whom  he  would  condemn  to  destruction.  We  affirm  that  this 
counsel,  as  far  as  concerns  the  elect,  is  founded  on  his  gratuitous 
mercy,  totally  irrespective  of  human  merit ;  but  that  to  those  whom 
he  devotes  to  condemnation,  the  gate  of  life  is  closed  by  a  just  and 
irreprehensible,  but  incomprehensible  judgment.  In  the  elect,  we 
consider  calling  as  an  evidence  of  election ;  and  justification  as 
another  token  of  its  manifestation,  till  they  arrive  in  glory,  which 
constitutes  its  completion.  As  God  seals  his  elect  by  vocation  and 
justification,  so  by  excluding  the  reprobate  from  the  knowledge  of 
his  name,  and  sanctification  of  his  Spirit,  he  affords  another  indica- 
tion of  the  judgment  that  awaits  them." 

In  the  commencement  of  the  following  chapter(3)  he  thus  rejects 
the  notion  that  predestination  is  to  be  understood  as  resulting  from 
God's  foreknowledge  of  what  would  be  the  conduct  of  either  the 
elect  or  the  reprobate.  "  It  is  a  notion  commonly  entertained,  that 
God,  foreseeing  what  would  be  the  respective  merits  of  every  indi- 
vidual, makes  a  correspondent  distinction  between  different  persons ; 
that  he  adopts  as  his  children  such  as  he  foreknows  will  be  deserv- 
ing of  his  grace ;  and  devotes  to  the  damnation  of  death  others, 
whose  dispositions  he  sees  will  be  inclined  to  wickedness  and  impiety. 
Thus  they  not  only  obscure  election  by  covering  it  with  the  veil  of 
foreknowledge,  but  pretend  that  it  originates  in  another  cause." 
Consistently  with  this,  he  a  little  farther  on  asserts,  that  election 
does  not  flow  from  holiness ;  but  holiness  from  election.  "  For 
when  it  is  said,  that  the  faithful  are  elected  that  they  should  be  holy, 
it  is  fully  implied,  that  the  holiness  they  were  in  future  to  possess, 
had  its  origin  in  election."  He  proceeds  to  quote  the  example  of 
Jacob  and  Esau,  as  loved  and  hated  before  they  had  done  good  or 
evil,  to  show  that  the  only  reason  of  election  and  reprobation  is  to 
be  placed  in  God's  "  secret  counsel."  He  will  not  allow  the  future 
wickedness  of  the  reprobate  to  have  been  considered  in  the  decree 
of  their  rejection,  any  more  than  the  righteousness  of  the  elect,  as 
influencing  their  better  fate.  "  God  hath  mercy  on  whom  he  will 
have  mercy ;  and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth.  You  see  how  he 
(the  apostle)  attributes  both  to  the  mere  will  of  God.  If,  therefore, 
we  can  assign  no  reason  why  he  grants  mercy  to  his  people  but 
because  such  is  his  pleasure,  neither  shall  we  find  any  other  cause 
but  his  will  for  the  reprobation  of  others.  For  when  God  is  said 
(2)  Chap.  21,  book  iii.  (3)  Book  iii.  chap.  22. 


HO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

to  harden,  or  show  mercy  to  whom  he  pleases,  men  are  taught  by 
this  declaration,  to  seek  no  cause  beside  his  ?e?7/."(4)  "  Many,  in- 
deed, as  if  they  wished  to  avert  odium  from  God,  admit  election  in 
such  a  way  as  to  deny  that  any  one  is  reprobated.  But  this  is 
puerile  and  absurd  ;  because  election  itself  could  not  exist,  without 
being  opposed  to  reprobation  : — whom  God  passes  by,  he  therefore 
reprobates ;  and  from  no  other  cause  than  his  determination  to  exclude 
them  from  the  inheritance  which  he  predestines  for  his  children."  (5) 
This  is  the  scheme  of  predestination  as  exhibited  by  Calvin  ;  and 
it  is  remarkable,  that  the  answers  which  he  is  compelled  to  give  to 
objections  did  not  unfold  to  this  great  and  acute  man  its  utter  con- 
trariety to  the  testimony  of  God,  and  to  all  established  notions  of 
equity  among  men.  To  the  objection  taken  from  justice,  he  replies, 
"  They  (the  objectors)  inquire  by  what  right  the  Lord  is  angry  with 
his  creatures  who  had  not  provoked  him  by  any  previous  offence  ; 
for  that  to  devote  to  destruction  whom  he  pleases,  is  more  like  the 
caprice  of  a  tyrant,  than  the  lawful  sentence  of  a  judge.  If  such 
thoughts  ever  enter  into  the  minds  of  pious  men,  they  will  be  suffi- 
ciently enabled  to  break  their  violence  by  this  one  consideration, 
how  exceedingly  presumptuous  it  is,  only  to  inquire  into  the  causes 
of  the  Divine  will;  which  is,  in  fact,  and  is  justly  entitled  to  be,  the 
cause  of  every  thing  that  exists.  For  if  it  has  any  cause,  then  there 
must  be  something  antecedent  on  which  it  depends,  which  it  is 
impious  to  suppose.  For  the  will  of  God  is  the  highest  rule  of 
justice  ;  so  that  what  he  wills  must  be  considered  just,  for  this  very 
reason,  because  he  wills  it."  The  evasions  are  here  curious. 
1.  He  assumes  the  very  thing  in  dispute,  that  God  has  willed  the 
destruction  of  any  part  of  the  human  race,  "  for  no  other  cause 
than  because  he  wills  it ;"  of  which  assumption  there  is  not  only 
not  a  word  of  proof  in  Scripture  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  all  Scrip- 
ture ascribes  the  death  of  him  that  dieth  to  his  own  will,  and  not  to 
the  will  of  God  ;  and  therefore  contradicts  his  statement.  2.  He 
pretends  that  to  assign  any  cause  to  the  Divine  will  is  to  suppose 
something  antecedent  to,  something  above  God,  and  therefore 
"  impious  ;"  as  if  we  might  not  suppose  something  in  God  to  be  the 
rule  of  his  will,  not  only  without  any  impiety,  but  with  truth  and 
piety ;  as,  for  instance,  his  perfect  wisdom,  holiness,  justice,  and 
goodness :  or,  in  other  words,  to  believe  the  exercise  of  his  will  to 
flow  from  the  perfection  of  his  whole  nature  ;  a  much  more  hon- 
ourable and  scriptural  view  of  the  will  of  God  than  that  which  sub- 
jects it  to  no  rule,  even  in  the  nature  of  God  himself.  3.  When  he 
calls  the  will  of  God,  "the  highest  rule  of  justice,"  beyond  which  we 
(4)  Ibid.  chap.  22.  (5)  Ibid.  chap.  23 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  Ill 

cannot  push  our  inquiries,  he  confounds  the  will  of  God,  as  a  rule 
of  justice  to  us,  and  as  a  rule  to  himself.  This  will  is  our  rule  ;  yet 
even  then,  because  we  know  that  it  is  the  will  of  a  perfect  being  ; 
but  when  Calvin  represents  mere  will  as  constituting  God's  own  rule 
of  justice,  he  shuts  out  knowledge,  discrimination  of  the  nature  of 
things,  and  holiness ;  which  is  saying  something  very  different  to 
that  great  truth,  that  God  cannot  will  any  thing  but  what  is  perfectly 
just.  It  is  to  say  that  blind  will ;  will  which  has  no  respect  to  any- 
thing but  itself;  is  God's  highest  rule  of  justice  ;  a  position  which, 
if  presented  abstractedly,  many  of  the  most  ultra  Calvinists  would 
spurn.  4.  He  determines  the  question  by  the  authority  of  his  own 
metaphysics,  and  totally  forgets,  that  one  dictum  of  inspiration  over- 
turns his  whole  theory, — God  "  willeth  all  men  to  be  saved  :"  a  de- 
claration, which,  in  no  part  of  the  sacred  volume,  is  opposed  or 
limited  by  any  contrary  declaration. 

"  Calvin,  is  not,  however,  content  thus  to  leave  the  matter ;  but 
resorts  to  an  argument  in  which  he  has  been  generally  followed  by 
those  who  have  adopted  his  system  with  some  mitigations.  "  As 
we  are  all  corrupted  by  sin,  we  must  necessarily  be  odious  to  God, 
and  that  not  from  tyrannical  cruelty  ;  but  in  the  most  equitable  esti- 
mation of  justice.  If  all  whom  the  Lord  predestinates  to  death  are, 
in  their  natural  condition,  liable  to  the  sentence  of  death,  what 
injustice  do  they  complain  of  receiving  from  him  ]"  To  this  Calvin 
very  fairly  states  the  obvious  rejoinder  made  in  his  day  ;  and  which 
the  common  sense  of  mankind  will  always  make, — "  They  object, 
were  they  not  by  the  decree  of  God  antecedently  predestinated  to 
that  corruption  which  is  now  stated  as  the  cause  of  their  condemn- 
ation 1  When  they  perish  in  their  corruption,  therefore,  they  only 
suffer  the  punishment  of  that  misery  into  which,  in  consequence  of 
his  predestination,  Adam  fell,  and  precipitated  his  posterity  with 
him."  The  manner  in  which  Calvin  attempts  to  refute  this  objec- 
tion, shows  how  truly  unanswerable  it  is  upon  his  system.  "  I  con- 
fess," says  he,  "  indeed,  that  all  the  descendants  of  Adam  fell,  by 
the  Divine  will,  into  that  miserable  condition  in  which  they  are  now 
involved ;  and  this  is  what  I  asserted  from  the  beginning,  that  we 
must  always  return  at  last  to  the  sovereign  determination  of  God's 
will ;  the  cause  of  which,  is  hidden  in  himself.  But  it  follows  not, 
therefore,  that  God  is  liable  to  this  reproach  ;  for  we  will  answer 
them  in  the  language  of  Paul,  '  O  man,  who  art  thou  that  repliest 
against  God  1  shall  the  thing  formed  say  to  him  that  formed  it,  Why 
hast  thou  made  me  thus  V  "  That  is,  in  order  to  escape  the  pinch  of 
the  objection,  he  assumes,  that  St.  Paul  atlirms  that  God  has  "  form- 
ed" a  part  of  the  human  race  for  eternal  misery  ;  and  that  by 


H2  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

imposing  silence  upon  them,  he  intended  to  declare  that  this  pro- 
ceeding in  God  was  just.     Now  the  passage  may  be  proved  from 
the  context  to  mean  no  such  thing ;  but,  if  that  failed,  and  it  were 
more  obscure  in  its  meaning  than  it  really  is,  such  an  interpretation 
would  be  contradicted  by  many  other  plain  texts  of  holy  writ,  of 
which  Calvin  takes  no  notice.     Even  if  this  text  would  serve  the 
purpose  better,  it  gives  no  answer  to  the  objection ;  for  we  are 
brought  round  again,  as  indeed  Calvin  confesses,  to  his  former,  and 
indeed  only  argument,  that  the  whole  matter,  as  he  states  it,  is  to 
be  referred  back  to  the  Divine  will ;  which  will,  though  perfectly 
arbitrary,  is,  as  he  contends,  the  highest  rule  of  justice.     "  I  say, 
with  Augustine,  that  the  Lord  created  those  whom  he  certainly 
foreknew  would  fall  into  destruction ;  and  that  this  was  actually  so, 
because  he  ivilled  it ;  but  of  his  will,  it  belongs  not  to  us  to  demand 
the  reason,  which  we  are  incapable  of  comprehending ;  nor  is  it 
reasonable,  that  the  Divine  will  should  be  made  the  subject  of  con- 
troversy with  us,  which  is  only  another  name  for  the  highest  rule  of 
justice."   Thus  he  shuts  us  out  from  pursuing  the  argument.  When 
God  places  fences  against  our  approach,  we  grant,  that  we  are 
bound  not  "  to  break  through  and  gaze  ;"  but  not  so,  when  man, 
without  authority,  usurps  this  authority,  and  warns  us  off  from  his 
own  inclosures,  as  though  we  were  trespassing  upon  the  peculiar 
domains  of  God  himself.     Calvin's  evasion  proves  the  objection 
unanswerable.    For  if  all  is  to  be  resolved  into  the  mere  will  of  God 
as  to  the  destruction  of  the  reprobate  ;  if  they  were  created  for  this 
purpose,  as  Calvin  expressly  affirms  ;  if  they  fell  into  their  corrup- 
tion in  pursuance  of  God's  determination  ;  if,  as  he  had  said  before, 
"  God  passes  them  by,  and  reprobates  them,  from  no  other  cause 
than  his  determination  to  exclude  them  from  the  inheritance  of  his 
children,"  why  refer  to  their  natural  corruption  at  all,  and  their 
being  odious  to  God  in  that  state,  since  the  same  reason  is  given 
for  their  corruption  as  for  their  reprobation  1 — not  any  fault  of 
theirs ;  but  the  mere  will  of  God,  "  the  reprobation  hidden  in  his 
secret  counsel,"  and  not  grounded  on  the  visible  and  tangible  fact 
of  their  demerit.   Thus  the  election  taught  by  Calvin  is  not  a  choice 
of  some  persons  to  peculiar  grace  from  the  whole  mass,  equally 
deserving  of  punishment ;  (though  this  is  a  sophism  ;)  for,  in  that 
case,  the  decree  of  reprobation  would  rest  upon  God's  foreknow- 
ledge of  those  passed  by  as  corrupt  and  guilty,  which  notion  he 
rejects.     "  For  since  God  foresees  future  events  only  in  conse- 
quence of  his  decree  that  they  shall  happen,  it  is  useless  to  contend 
about  foreknowledge,  while  it  is  evident  that  all  things  come  to  pass 
rather  by  ordination  and  decree"     It  is  a  horrible  decree  I  con- 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  118 

fess ;  but  no  one  can  deny  that  God  foreknew  the  future  fate  of 
man  before  he  created  him ;  and  that  he  did  foreknow  it,  because 
it  was  appointed  by  his  own  decree.  Agreeably  to  this,  he  repu- 
diates the  distinction  between  will  and  permission.  "For  what 
reason  shall  we  assign  for  his  permitting  it,  but  because  it  is  his 
will?  It  is  not  probable,  however,  that  man  procured  his  own 
destruction  by  the  mere  permission,  and  without  any  appointment  of 
God." 

With  this  doctrine  he  again  makes  a  singular  attempt  to  reconcile 
the  demerit  of  men  :  "  Their  perdition  depends  on  the  Divine  pre- 
destination in  such  a  manner,  that  the  cause  and  matter  of  it  are 
found  in  themselves.  For  the  first  man  fell  because  the  Lord  had 
determined  it  should  so  happen.  The  reason  of  this  determination 
is  unknown  to  us. — Man,  therefore,  falls  according  to  the  appoint- 
ment of  Divine  Providence  ;  but  he  falls  by  his  own  fault.  The  Lord 
had  a  little  before  pronounced  every  thing  that  he  had  made  to  be 
■  very  good.'  Whence,  then,  comes  the  depravity  of  man  to  revolt 
from  his  God  1  Lest  it  should  be  thought  to  come  from  creation, 
God  approved  and  commended  what  had  proceeded  from  himself. 
By  his  own  wickedness,  therefore,  man  corrupted  the  nature  he 
had  received  pure  from  the  Lord,  and  by  his  fall  he  drew  all  his 
posterity  with  him  to  destruction."  It  is  in  this  way  that  Calvin 
attempts  to  avoid  the  charge  of  making  God  the  author  of  sin.  But 
how  God  should  not  merely  permit  the  defection  of  the  first  man, 
but  appoint  it,  and  will  it,  and  that  his  will  should  be  the  "  necessity 
of  things,"  all  which  he  had  before  asserted,  and  yet  that  Deity 
should  not  pe  the  author  of  that  which  he  appointed,  icilled,  and 
imposed  a  necessity  upon,  would  be  rather  a  delicate  inquiry.  It  is 
enough  that  Calvin  rejects  the  impious  doctrine,  and  even  though 
his  principles  directly  lead  to  it,  since  he  has  put  in  his  disclaimer, 
he  is  entitled  to  be  exempted  from  the  charge ; — but  the  logical 
conclusion  is  inevitable. 

In  much  the  same  manner  he  contends  that  the  necessity  of 
sinning  is  laid  upon  the  reprobate  by  the  ordination  of  God,  and 
yet  denies  God  to  be  the  author  of  their  sin,  since  the  corruption  of 
men  was  derived  from  Adam,  by  his  own  fault,  and  not  from  God. 
Here,  also,  although  the  difficulty  still  remains  of  conceiving  how  a 
necessity  of  sinning  should  be  laid  on  the  descendants  of  Adam,  and 
that  without  any  counteraction  of  grace  in  the  case  of  the  repro- 
bate, and  that  this  should  be  attributable  to  the  will  of  God  as  its 
cause,  whilst  yet  God,  in  no  sense  injurious  to  his  perfections,  is  to 
be  regarded  as  the  author  of  sin,  we  still  admit  Calvin's  disclaimer ; 
but.  then  he  cannot  have  the  advantage  on  both  sides,  and  must 
Vol.  III.  15 


114  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

renounce  this  or  some  of  his  former  positions.  He  exhorts  us  "rather 
to  contemplate  the  evident  cause  of  condemnation,  which  is  nearer 
to  us,  in  the  corrupt  nature  of  mankind,  than  search  after  a  hidden, 
and  altogether  incomprehensible  one,  in  the  predestination  of  God." 
"  For  though,  by  the  eternal  providence  of  God,  man  was  created 
to  that  misery  to  which  he  is  subject,  yet  the  ground  of  it  he  has 
derived  from  himself,  not  God  ;  since  he  is  thus  ruined,  solely  in 
consequence  of  his  having  degenerated  from  the  pure  creation  of 
God  to  vicious  and  impure  depravity."  Thus,  almost  in  the  same 
breath,  he  affirms  that  men  became  reprobate  from  no  other  cause 
than  "  the  will  of  God,"  and  his  "  sovereign  determination  ;" — that 
men  have  no  reason  "  to  expostulate  with  God,  if  they  are  predesti- 
nated to  eternal  death,  without  any  demerit  of  their  own,  merely  by 
his  sovereign  will ;" — and  then,  that  the  corrupt  nature  of  mankind 
is  the  evident  and  nearer  cause  of  condemnation ;  (which  cause, 
however,  was  still  a  matter  of  "  appointment,"  and  "  ordination," 
not  "  permission ;")  and  that  man  is  "  ruined  solely  in  consequence 
of  his  having  degenerated  from  the  pure  state  in  which  God  created 
him."  Now  these  propositions  manifestly  fight  with  each  other ; 
for  if  the  reason  of  reprobation  be  laid  in  man's  corruption,  it  cannot 
be  laid  in  the  mere  will  and  sovereign  determination  of  God,  unless 
we  suppose  him  to  be  the  author  of  sin.  It  is  this  offensive  doctrine 
only,  which  can  reconcile  them.  For  if  God  so  wills,  and  appoints, 
and  necessitates  the  depravity  of  man,  as  to  be  the  author  of  it,  then 
there  is  no  inconsistency  in  saying  that  the  ruin  of  the  reprobate  is 
both  from  the  mere  will  of  God,  and  from  the  corruption  of  their 
nature,  which  is  but  the  result  of  that  will.  The  one  is  then,  as 
Calvin  states,  the  "  evident  and  nearer  cause,"  the  other  the  more 
remote  and  hidden  one ;  yet  they  have  the  same  source,  and  are 
substantially  acts  of  the  same  will.  But  if  it  be  denied  that  God  is, 
in  any  sense,  the  author  of  evil,  and  if  sin  is  from  man  alone,  then 
is  the  "  corruption  of  nature"  the  effect  of  an  independent  will ;  and 
if  this  be  the  "  real  source,"  as  he  says,  of  men's  condemnation,  then 
the  decree  of  reprobation  rests  not  upon  the  sovereign  will  of  God, 
as  its  sole  cause,  which  he  affirms ;  but  upon  a  cause  dependant 
on  the  will  of  the  first  man.  But  as  this  is  denied,  then  the  other 
must  follow.  Calvin  himself  indeed  contends  for  the  perfect  con- 
currence of  these  proximate  and  remote  causes,  although,  in  point 
of  fact,  to  have  been  perfectly  consistent  with  himself,  he  ought 
rather  to  have  called  the  mere  loill  o/God  the  cause  of  the  decree 
of  reprobation,  and  the  corruption  of  man  the  means  by  which  it 
is  carried  into  effect :  language  which  he  sanctions,  and  which 
many  of  his  followers  have  not  scrupled  to  adopt. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  115 

So  tearfully  does  this  opinion  involve  in  it  the  consequences  that 
in  sin  man  is  the  instrument,  and  God  the  actor,  that  it  cannot  be 
maintained,  as  stated  by  Calvin,  without  this  conclusion.     For  as 
two  causes  of  reprobation  are  expressly  laid  down,  they  must  be 
either  opposed  to  each  other,  or  be  consenting.     If  they  are  op- 
posed, the  scheme  is  given  up  ;  if  consenting,  then  are  both  repro- 
bation and  human  corruption  the  results  of  the  same  will,  the  same 
decree,  and  necessity.     It  would  be  trilling  to  say,  that  the  decree 
does  not  influence  ;  for  if  so,  it  is  no  decree  in  Calvin's  sense,  who 
understands  the  decree  of  God,  as  the  foregoing  extracts  and  the 
whole  third  book  of  his  Institutes  plainly  show,  as  appointing  what 
shall  be,  and  by  that  appointment  making  it  necessary.    Otherwise, 
he  could  not  reject  the  distinction  between  will  and  permission, 
and  avow  the  sentiment  of  St.  Augustine,  "  that  the  will  of  God  is 
the  necessity  of  things  ;  and  that  what  he  has  willed,  will  necessarily 
come  to  pass." (6)     So,  in  writing  to  Castalio,  he  makes  the  sin  of 
Adam  the  result  of  an  act  of  God.     "  You  say  Adam  fell  by  his 
free  will.     I  except  against  it.     That  he  might  not  fall,  he  stood  in 
need  of  that  strength  and  constancy  with  which  God  armeth  all  the 
elect,  as  long  as  he  will  keep  them  blameless.     Whom  God  has 
elected,  he  props  up  with  an  invincible  power  unto  perseverance. 
Why  did  he  not  afford  this  to  Adam,  if  he  would  have  had  him 
stand  in  his  integrity  ?"(7)     And  with  this  view  of  necessity,  as 
resulting  from  the  decree  of  God,  the  immediate  followers  of  Calvin 
coincide ;  the  end  and  the  means,  as  to  the  elect,  and  as  to  the 
reprobate,  are  equally  fixed  by  the  decree  ;    and  are  both  to  be 
traced  to  the  appointing  and  ordaining  will  of  God.     On  such  a 
scheme  it  is  therefore  worse  than  trifling  to  attempt  to  make  out  a 
case  of  justice  in  favour  of  this  assumed  Divine  procedure,  by 
alleging  the  corruption  and  guilt  of  man :  a  point  which,  indeed, 
Calvin  himself,  in  fact,  gives  up  when  he  says,  "  that  the  reprobate 
obey  not  the  word  of  God,  when  made  known  to  them,  is  justly 
imputed  to  the  wickedness  and  depravity  of  their  nearts,  provided  it 
be  at  the  same  time  staled,  that  they  are  abandoned  to  this  depravity, 
because  they  have  been  raised  up  by  a  just,  but  inscrutable  judgment, 
of  God,  to  display  his  glory  in  their  condemnation."  (8) 

It  is  by  availing  themselves  of  these  ineffectual  druggies  of  Cal- 
vin to  give  some  colour  of  justice  to  his  reprobating  decree,  by 
fixing  upon  the  corruption  of  man  as  a  cause  of  reprobation,  that 
some  of  his  followers  have  endeavoured,  in  the  very  teeth  of  his 

(6)  Book  iii,  chap.  23,  sec.  8.  (7)  Quoted  in  Bishop  Womack's  Calvinist 
Cabinet  Unlocked,  p.  34.     (81  Inst.  Book  iii,  chap.  24,  sec.  14. 


Uti  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

own  express  words,  to  reduce  his  system  to  supralapsai  ianisrn.  This 
was  attempted  by  Amyraldus  ;  who  was  answered  by  Curcelloeus, 
in  his  tract  "  De  Jure  Dei  in  Creaturas."  This  last  writer,  partly 
by  several  of  the  same  passages  we  have  given  above  from  Calvin's 
Institutes,  and  by  extracts  from  his  other  writings,  proves  that  Cal- 
vin did  by  no  means  consider  man,  as  fallen,  to  be  the  object  of 
reprobation  ;  but  man  not  yet  created ;  man  as  to  be  created,  and 
so  reprobated,  under  no  consideration  in  the  Divine  mind  of  his 
fall  or  actual  guilt,  except  as  consequences  of  an  eternal  pretention 
of  the  persons  of  the  reprobate,  resolvable  only  into  the  sovereign 
pleasure  of  God.  The  references  he  makes  to  men  as  corrupt,  and 
to  their  corrupt  state  as  the  proximate  cause  of  their  rejection,  are 
all  manifestly  used  to  parry  off  rather  than  to  answer  objections, 
and  somewhat  to  soften,  as  Curcelloeus  observes,  the  harsher  parts 
of  his  system.  And,  indeed,  for  what  reason  are  we  so  often  brought 
back  to  that  unfailing  refuge  of  Calvin  and  his  followers,  "  the  pre- 
sumption and  wickedness  of  replying  against  God  V  For  if  repro- 
bation be  a  matter  of  human  desert,  it  cannot  be  a  mystery  ;  if  it  be 
adequate  punishment  for  an  adequate  fault,  there  is  no  need  to  urge 
it  upon  us  to  bow  with  submission  to  an  unexplained  sovereignty. 
We  may  add,  there  is  no  need  to  speak  of  a  remote  or  first  cause 
of  reprobation,  if  the  proximate  cause  will  explain  the  whole  case  ; 
and  that  Calvin's  continual  reference  to  God's  secret  counsel,  and 
ivill,  and  inscrutable  judgment,  could  have  no  aptness  to  his  argu- 
ment. (9)  Among  English  divines,  Dr.  Twiss  has  sufficiently  de- 
fended Calvin  from  the  charge,  as  he  esteems  it,  of  sublapsarianism  ; 
and,  whatever  merit  Twiss's  own  supralapsarian  creed  may  have, 
his  argument  on  this  point  is  unanswerable. 

This  then  is  the  doctrine  of  Calvin,  which  was  followed  by  several 
of  the  churches  of  the  Reformation,  who  in  this  respect  distinguished 
themselves  from  the  Lutherans.  ( 1 )     It  was  a  doctrine,  however, 

(9)  Amyraldus  tamen,  ut  eum  infra  lapsum  substitisse  probet,  in  constituendo 
reprobationis  objecto,  profert  quaedam  loca  in  quibus  ille  corruptee  massa:  meminit, 
et  Wjus  decreti  aequitatem  ab  originali  peccato  arcessit.  Sed  facilis  est  responsio. 
Nam  Calvinus  ipse,  qua  ratione  ista  cum  iis  quae  attuli  sint  concilianda  nos  docet : 
nimirum  aoAubita  distinctione  inter  propinquam  reprobationis  causam.  quam  resi- 
dentem  in  nobis  corruptionem  esse  vult,  et  remotam.  quae  sit  unicutn  Dei  bene- 
placitum.  Et  quan^uam  variis  in  locis  causam  propinquam,  veluti  ad  sententie 
susb  duritiem  emolliendcm  aptiorem,  magis  videatur  urgcre ;  ita  tamen  id  facitut 
non  rard  consilii  arcani,  voluntatis  occulta,  judicii  inscrutabilis,  et  similium,  qui- 
bus primam  rejectionis  causam  solet  designare,  ibidem  simul  meminerit. — De  Jure 
Dei,  &c,  cap.  x. 

(1)  "  The  Reformed  Church,  in  the  largest  import  of  tho  word,  comprises  all 
the  religious  communities  which  have  separated  themselves  from  the  Church  of 
Rome.    In  this  sense  the  words  are  often  used  by  English  writers;  but  having 


.SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  117 

unknown  in  the  primitive  churches ;  and  may  be  ranked  among 
those  errors  which  the  pagan  philosophy  subsequently  engrafted 
upon  the  faith  of  Christ.  (2) 

Bishop  Tomline's  "Refutation  of  Calvinism,"  although  very 
erroneous  in  some  of  its  doctrinal  views,  has  some  valuable  and 
conclusive  quotations  from  the  ancient  Fathers,  proving  "  that  the 
peculiar  tenets  of  Calvinism  are  in  direct  opposition  to  the  doc- 
trines maintained  in  the  first  ages."  They  also  show  that  there  is 
a  great  similarity  between  some  points  in  that  system  and  several 
of  the  most  prevalent  of  the  early  heresies.  "  The  Manicheans 
denied  the  freedom  of  the  human  will ;  and  spoke  of  the  elect  as 
persons  who  could  not  sin,  or  fail  of  salvation."  The  fruitful 
source  of  these  notions  was  the  Gnosticism  of  early  times,  which 
was  the  worst  part  of  the  speculative  pagan  pliilosophy,  engrafted 
on  a  corrupted  Christianity ;  and  was  vigorously  opposed  by  the 
Fathers,  from  the  earliest  date.  In  this  system  of  affected  and 
dreaming  wisdom  it  was  assumed,  that  some  souls  were  created 
bad,  and  others  good  ;  and  that  they  sprung,  therefore,  from  differ- 
ent principles,  or  creators.  Origen  contended,  in  opposition  to 
these  speculations,  that  all  souls  were  by  nature  of  the  same  quality  ; 
that  the  use  of  the  freedom  of  will  made  the  differences  we  see  in 
practice  ;  and  that  this  liberty  rendered  them  liable  to  reward  and 
to  punishment ;  ascribing,  however,  this  recovered  freedom  of  the 
will,  which  had  been  lost  in  Adam,  to  the  grace  of  Christ.  The 
Platonism  which  he  mixed  up  with  his  system  was  justly  resisted  in 
the  church ;  but  his  doctrine  of  the  freedom  of  the  will  prevailed 
generally  in  the  east.  It  was  afterwards  carried  to  a  dangerous 
extent  by  Pelagius,  whose  doctrine  was  modified  by  Cassian.  These 
discussions  called  Augustine  into  a  controversy  which  carried  him 

been  adopted  by  the  French  Calvinists  to  describe  their  Church,  this  term  is  most 
commonly  used  on  the  Continent  as  a  general  appellation  of  all  the  churches  who 
profess  the  doctrines  of  Calvin.  About  the  year  1541,  the  church  of  Geneva  was 
placed  by  the  magistrates  of  that  city  under  the  direction  of  Calvin,  where  his 
learning,  eloquence,  and  talents  for  business,  soon  attracted  general  notice.  By 
degrees  his  fame  reached  to  every  part  of  Europe.  Having  prevailed  upon  the 
senate  of  Geneva  to  found  an  academy,  and  place  it  under  his  superintendence ; 
and  having  filled  it  with  men,  eminent  throughout  Europe  for  their  learning  and 
talent,  it  became  the  favourite  resort  of  all  persons  who  leaned  to  the  new  princi- 
ples, and  sought  religious  and  literary  instruction.  From  Germany,  France,  Italy, 
England,  and  Scotland,  numbers  crowded  to  the  new  academy,  and  returned  from 
it  to  their  native  countries,  satnrated  with  the  doctrine  of  Geneva  ;  and  burning 
with  zeal  to  propagate  its  creed." — Butler's  Life  of  Grotius. 

(2)  This  wastheviewof  MELANCTHON,who  in  writing  to  Peucer,  says,  "Lcclius 
writes  to  me  and  says,  that  the  controversy  respecting  the  Stoical  Fate,  is 
agitated  with  such  uncommon  fervour  at  Geneva,  that  one  individual  is  cast  into 
prison  because  he  happened  to  differ  from  Zeno." 


tl8  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

to  the  opposite  extreme ;  and  appears  to  have  revived  the  Manichean 
notions  of  his  youth  in  such  a  degree  as  greatly  to  tinge  many  parts 
of  his  system  with  that  heresy.  He  was  a  powerful,  but  unsteady 
writer ;  and  has  expressed  himself  so  inconsistently  as  to  have 
divided  the  opinions  of  the  Latin  church,  where  his  authority  has 
always  been  greatest.  He  held,  although  his  writings  afford  many 
passages  contradictory  of  the  statement,  that  "God,  from  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world,  decreed  to  save  some  men,  and  to  consign  others 
to  eternal  punishment."  Notwithstanding  his  authority,  his  views 
on  predestination  and  grace  appear  to  have  made  no  great  impres- 
sion upon  even  the  western  church,  where  the  Collations  of  Cassian, 
a  disciple  of  Chrysostom,  a  work  which  has  been  called  semi- 
Pelagian,  was  held  in  extensive  estimation  ;  so  that  substantially  no 
great  difference  of  opinion  appeared  between  the  western  and  the 
Greek  churches,  on  these  points,  for  several  centuries.  In  the 
ninth  century  St.  Austin's  doctrines  were  revived  and  asserted  by 
Goteschale,  who  was  as  absurdly  as  wickedly  persecuted  on  that 
account.  His  doctrines  were  condemned  in  two  councils  ;  and  the 
controversy  was  laid  to  rest,  until  the  subtle  questions  contained  in 
it  were  revived  by  the  schoolmen.  Thomas  Aquinas  and  the 
Dominicans  adopted  the  strongest  views  of  Augustine  on  predesti- 
nation and  necessity,  and  improved  upon  them ;  Scotus  and  the 
Franciscans  took  the  opposite  side ;  and  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pope  has  not  yet  been  employed  to  settle  this  point.  By  condemn- 
ing Jansenius,  however,  whilst  it  has  honoured  Augustine,  that 
church,  as  Bayle  observes,  (3)  has  involved  itself  in  great  perplex- 
ities. The  authority  of  this  Father  with  the  church  of  Rome  was 
indeed  an  advantage  which  the  first  Reformers  did  not  fail  to  make 
use  of.  From  him  they  supported  their  views  on  justification  by 
faith ;  and  finding  so  much  of  evangelical  truth  on  this  and  some 
other  subjects  in  his  writings,  they  were  insensibly  biassed  to  the 
worst  parts  of  his  system.  Luther  recovered  from  this  error  in  the 
latter  part  of  his  life ;  and  the  Lutheran  churches  settled  in  the 
doctrine  of  universal  redemption.  (4)     Augustinism,  as  perfected 

(3)  Dictionary,  Art.  Augustine. 

(4)  "  It  is  pleasing,"  says  Dr.  Copleston,  "and  satisfactory,  to  trace  the  pro- 
gress of  Melancthon's  opinions  upon  the  subject.  In  the  first  dawning  of  the 
Reformation,  he,  as  well  as  Luther,  had  been  led  into  those  metaphysical  discus- 
sions which  Calvin  afterwards  moulded  into  a  system,  and  incorporated  with  his 
exposition  of  the  Christian  doctrine.  But  so  early  as  the  year  1529  he  renounced 
this  error,  and  expunged  the  passages  that  contained  it  from  the  later  editions  of 
his  Loci  Theologici.  Luther,  who  had  in  his  early  life  maintained  the  same  opin- 
ions, after  the  controversy  with  Eiasmus  about  free-will,  never  taught  them  ;  and 
although  he  did  not,  with  the  candour  of  Melancthon,  openly  retract  what  he  had 
once  written,  yet  he  bestowed  the  highest  commendations  on  thfi  last  editions  of 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  119 

and  systematised  by  the  able  hand  of  Calvin,  was  received  by 
several  of  the  Reformed  churches  ;  and  gave  rise  to  a  controversy 
which  has  remained  to  this  day,  though  happily  it  has  of  late  been 
conducted  with  less  asperity.  The  system,  as  issued  by  Calvin, 
has,  however,  undergone  various  modifications  :  some  theologians 
and  their  followers,  having  carried  out  his  principles  to  their  full 
length,  so  as  to  advocate  or  sanction  the  Antinomian  heresy ; 
whilst  others,  either  to  avoid  this  fearful  result,  or  perceiving  the 
discrepancy  of  the  harsher  parts  of  the  theory  with  the  word  of  God, 
have  impressed  upon  it  a  more  mitigated  aspect. 

The  three  leading  schemes  of  predestination,  prevalent  among 
the  Reformed  churches  previous  to  the  Synod  of  Dort,  are  thus 
stated  in  the  celebrated  Declaration  of  Arminius  before  the  states 
of  Holland.  They  comprehend  the  theories  generally  known  by 
the  names  of  supralapsarian  and  sublapsarian. 

"The  first,  or  Creabilitarian,  or  supralapsarian  opinion  is, 

1.  That  God  has  absolutely  and  precisely  decreed  to  save  certain 
particular  men  by  his  mercy  or  grace  ;  but  to  condemn  others  by 
his  justice  ;  and  to  do  all  this,  without  having  any  regard  in  such 
decree  to  righteousness  or  sin,  obedience  or  disobedience,  which 
could  possibly  exist  on  the  part  of  one  class  of  men,  or  the  other. 

2.  That  for  the  execution  of  the  preceding  degree,  God  determined 
to  create  Adam,  and  all  men  in  him,  in  an  upright  state  of  original 
righteousness  ;  besides  which,  he  also  ordained  them  to  commit  sin, 
that  they  might  thus  become  guilty  of  eternal  condemnation,  and 
be  deprived  of  original  righteousness  3.  That  those  persons  whom 
God  has  thus  positively  wished  to  save,  he  has  decreed,  not  only  to 
salvation,  but  also  to  the  means  which  pertain  to  it ;  that  is,  to  con- 
duct and  bring  them  to  faith  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  to  perseverance 
in  that  faith  ;  and  that  he  also  leads  them  to  these  results  by  a  grace 
and  power  that  are  irresistible  ;  so  that  it  is  not  possible  for  them 
to  do  otherwise  than  believe,  persevere  in  faith,  and  be  saved. 
4.  That  to  those,  whom,  by  his  absolute  will,  God  has  foreordained 
to  perdition,  he  has  also  decreed  to  deny  that  grace  which  is  neces- 

Melancthon's  work,  containing  this  correction. (g)  He  also  scrupled  not  to  assert 
publicly,  that  at  the  beginning  of  the  Reformation,  his  creed  was  not  completely 
settled  :(li)  and  in  his  last  work  of  any  importance,  he  is  anxious  to  point  out  the 
qualifications,  with  which  all  he  had  ever  said,  on  the  doctrine  of  absolute  neces- 
sity, ought  to  be  received."  "  Vos  ergo,  qui  nunc  mc  audistis,  memineritis  me 
hoc  docuisse,  non  esse  inquirendum  de  Praedestinatione  Dei  absconditi,  sed  in 
illis  acquiescendum,  quas  revelantur  per  vocationem  et  per  ministorium  vcrbi  .  . 
.  .  Hsec  eadem  alibi  quoque  in  meis  libris  protestatus  sum,  et  nunc  etiam  viva 
voce  trado:  Idco  sum  excusatus.(i) 

(g)  Pref.  to  the  first  vol.  of  Luther's  works,  A.  D.  154G. 

(A)  Laur.  Bampt.  Lcct.  note  Z\  to  Serm.  ii.  (»')  On.  vol.  vi,  p.  325 


120  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

sary  and  sufficient  for  salvation  ;  and  does  not,  in  reality,  confer  it 
upon  them  ;  so  that  they  are  neither  placed  in  a  possible  condition, 
nor  in  any  capacity  of  believing,  or  of  being  saved."  (5) 

The  second  opinion  differs  from  the  former ;  but  is  still  supra- 
lapsarian.     It  is, 

"  1.  That  God  determined  within  himself,  by  an  eternal  immu- 
table decree,  to  make,  according  to  his  good  pleasure,  the  smaller 
portion  out  of  the  general  mass  of  mankind  partakers  of  his  grace 
and  glory.  But,  according  to  his  pleasure,  he  passed  by  the  greater 
portion  of  men,  and  left  them  in  their  own  nature,  which  is  incapable 
of  any  thing  supernatural ;  and  did  not  communicate  to  them  that 
saving  and  supernatural  grace  by  which  their  nature,  if  it  still 
retained  its  integrity,  might  be  strengthened  ;  or  by  which,  if  it  were 
corrupted,  it  might  be  restored,  for  a  demonstration  of  his  own 
liberty :  yet  after  God  had  made  these  men  sinners,  and  guilty  of 
death,  he  punished  them  with  death  eternal,  for  a  demonstration  of 
his  justice." — "  As  far  as  we  are  capable  of  comprehending  their 
scheme  of  reprobation  it  consists  of  two  acts,  that  of  preterition, 
and  that  of  predamnation.  Preterition  is  antecedent  to  all 
things,  and  to  all  causes  which  are  either  in  the  things  themselves, 
or  which  arise  out  of  them ;  that  is,  it  has  no  regard  whatever  to 
any  sin,  and  only  views  man  under  an  absolute  and  general  aspect. 
Two  means  are  foreordained  for  the  execution  of  the  act  of  pre- 
terition :  dereliction  in  a  state  of  nature  which,  by  itself,  is 
incapable  of  every  thing  supernatural ;  and  the  non-communication  of 
supernatural  grace,  by  which  their  nature,  if  in  a  state  of  integrity, 
might  be  strengthened,  and  if  in  a  state  of  corruption,  might  be 
restored.  Predamnation  is  antecedent  to  all  things  ;  yet  it  does 
by  no  means  exist  without  a  foreknowledge  of  the  cause  of  damna- 
tion. It  views  man  as  a  sinner  obnoxious  to  damnation  in  Adam, 
and  as,  on  this  account,  perishing  through  the  necessity  of  Divine 
justice." 

This  opinion  differs  from  the  first  in  this,  that  it  does  not  lay  down 
the  creation  or  the  fall  as  a  mediate  cause,  foreordained  of  God  for 
the  execution  of  the  decree  of  reprobation ;  yet  this  second  kind  of 
predestination  places  election,  with  regard  to  the  end,  before  the 
fall,  as  also  preterition,  or  passing  by,  which  is  the  first  part  of 
reprobation.  "But  though  the  inventors  of  this  scheme,"  says 
Arminius,  "  have  been  desirous  of  using  the  greatest  precaution, 

(5)  This  statement  of  the  supralapsarian  and  sublapsarian  theories,  as  given  by 
Arminius,  might  be  illustrated  and  verified  by  quotations  from  the  elder  Calvin- 
istic  divines :  the  reader  will,  however,  find  what  is  amply  sufficient  in  those  given 
in  Bishop  Womack's  Calvinistic  Cabinet  Unlocked. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  121 

lest  it  might  be  concluded  from  their  doctrine,  that  God  is  the 
author  of  sin  with  as  much  show  of  probability  as  it  is  deducible 
from  the  first  scheme  ;  yet  we  shall  discover,  that  the  fall. of  Adam 
cannot  possibly,  according  to  their  views,  be  considered  in  any 
other  manner  than  as  a  necessary  means  for  the  execution  of  the 
preceding  decree  of  predestination.  For,  first,  it  states  that  God 
determined  by  the  decree  of  reprobation  to  deny  to  man  that  grace 
which  was  necessary  for  the  confirmation  and  strengthening  of  his 
nature,  that  it  might  not  be  corrupted  by  sin ;  which  amounts  to 
this,  that  God  decreed  not  to  bestow  that  grace  which  was  neces- 
sary to  avoid  sin ;  and  from  this  must  necessarily  follow  the  trans- 
gression of  man,  as  proceeding  from  a  law  imposed  upon  him.  The 
fall  of  man  is,  therefore,  a  means  ordained  for  the  execution  of  the 
decree  of  reprobation." 

"  2.  It  states  the  two  parts  of  reprobation  to  be  pretention  and 
predomination.  Those  two  parts,  (although  the  latter  views  man  as 
a  sinner,  and  obnoxious  to  justice,)  are,  according  to  that  decree, 
connected  together  by  a  necessary  and  mutual  bond,  and  are  equally 
extensive  ;  for  those  whom  God  passed  by  in  conferring  grace,  are 
likewise  damned.  Indeed,  no  others  are  damned  except  those  who 
are  the  subjects  of  this  act  of  pretention.  From  this,  therefore,  it 
must  be  concluded,  that  sin  necessarily  follows  from  the  decree  of 
reprobation  or  pretention ;  because,  if  it  were  otherwise,  it  might 
possibly  happen,  that  a  person  who  had  been  passed  by  might  not 
commit  sin,  and  from  that  circumstance  might'  not  become  liable 
to  damnation.  This  second  opinion  on  predestination,  therefore, 
falls  into  the  same  inconvenience  as  the  first, — the  making  God  the 
author  of  sin." (G) 

The  third  opinion  is  sublapsarian  ;  in  which  man,  as  the  object 
of  predestination,  is  considered  as  fallen,  (7)  It  is  thus  epitomised 
by  Arminius : 

(G)  Declaration. 

(7)  The  question  as  to  the  olject  of  the  decrees,  has  gone  out,  as  Goodwin  says, 
among  our  Calvinistic  brethren  into  "  endless  digladiations  and  irreconcilable 
divisions : — some  of  them  hold,  that  men  simply  and  indefinitely  considered,  are 
tho  object  of  these  decrees.  Others  contend,  that  men  considered  as  yet  to  be 
created,  are  this  object.  A  third  sort  stands  up  against  both  the  former  with  tins 
notion,  that  men  considered  as  already  created  and  made,  are  this  object.  A  fourth 
disparageth  the  conjectures  of  the  three  former  with  this  conceit,  that  men  consi- 
dered as  fallen,  are  this  object.  Another  findeth  a  defect  in  the  singleness  or 
simplicity  of  all  the  former  opinions,  and  compoundeth  this  in  opposition  to  them, 
that  men  considered  both  as  to  be  created,  and  as  being  created  and  as  fallen, 
together3  are  the  proper  object  of  these  troublesome  decrees.  A  sixth  sortformelh 
us  yet  another  object,  and  this  is,  man  considered  as  salvable,  or  capable  of  being 
saved.  A  seventh,  not  liking  the  faint  complexion  of  any  of  tho  former  opinions, 
delivereth  this  to  us  as  strong  and  healthful,  that  men  considered^  damnable-,  are 
Voj,  III.  16 


122  1HEOLOU1CAL  INSTITUTES  [PARI 

"  Because  God  willed  within  himself  from  all  eternity  to  make  a 
decree  by  which  he  might  elect  certain  men  and  reprobate  the  rest, 
he  viewed  and  considered  the  human  race  not  only  as  created,  but 
likewise  as  fallen,  or  corrupt ;  and,  on  that  account,  obnoxious  to 
malediction.  Out  of  this  lapsed  and  accursed  state  God  determi- 
mined  to  liberate  certain  individuals,  and  freely  to  save  them  by  his 
grace,  for  a  declaration  of  his  mercy  ;  but  he  resolved,  in  his  own 
just  judgment,  to  leave  the  rest  under  malediction,  for  a  declaration 
of  his  justice.  In  both  these  cases  God  acts  without  the  least  con- 
sideration of  repentance  and  faith  in  those  whom  he  elects,  or  of 
impenitence  and  unbelief  in  those  whom  he  reprobates.  This  opinion 
places  the  fall  of  man,  not  as  a  means  foreordained  for  the  execution 
of  the  decree  of  predestination,  as  before  explained  ;  but  as  some- 
thing that  might  furnish  a  proceresis,  or  occasion  for  this  decree  of 
predestination.  (8) 

With  this  opinion,  however,  the  necessity  of  the  fall  is  so  generally 
connected,  that  it  escapes  the  difficulties  which  environ  the  pre- 
ceding scheme  in  words  only ;  for  whether,  in  the  decree  of  pre- 
destination, man  is  considered  as  creatible,  or  created  and  fallen, 
if  a  necessity  be  laid  upon  any  part  of  the  race  to  sin,  and  to  be 
made  miserable,  whether  from  that  which  rendered  the  fall  inevita- 
ble, or  that  which  rendered  the  fall  the  inevitable  means  of  cor- 
rupting their  nature,  and  producing  entire  moral  disability  without 
relief,  the  condition  of  the  reprobate  remains  substantially  the  same ; 
and  the  administration  under  which  they  are  placed,  is  equally 
opposed  to  justice  as  to  grace.  For  let  us  shut  out  all  these  fine 
distinctions  between  acts  of  sovereignty  and  acts  of  justice,  prete- 
ntion and  predamnation,  and  fully  allow  the  principle,  that  all  are 
fallen  in  Adam,  in  what  way  can  even  the  sublapsarian  doctrine 
be  supported  1  It  has  two  objects ;  to  avoid  the  imputation  of 
making  God  the  author  of  sin,  and  to  repel  the  charge  of  his  dealing 
with  his  creatures  unjustly.  We  need  only  take  the  latter  as  neces- 
sary to  the  argument,  and  show  how  utterly  they  fail  to  turn  aside 
this  most  fatal  objection  drawn  from  the  justice  of  the  Divine  nature 
and  administration. 

this  object.  Others  yet  again,  superfancying  all  the  former,  conceit  men,  consi- 
dered as  creabh,  or  possible  to  be  created,  to  be  the  object  so  highly  contested 
about.  A  ninth  party  disciple  the  world  with  this  doctrine,  that  men  considered 
as  labiles,  or  capable  of  falling,  are  the  object ;  and  whether  all  the  scattered  and 
conflicting  opinions  about  the  objects  of  our  brethren's  decrees  of  election  and 
reprobation  are  bound  up  in  this  bundle  or  not,  we  cannot  say." — Agreement  of 
Brethren,  &c. 

In  modern  times  these  subtile  distinctions  have  rather  fallen  into  desuetude 
among  Calvinists,  and  are  reducible  to  a  much  smaller  number, 

(8)  lb. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  123 

It  is  an  easy  and  plausible  thing  to  say,  in  the  usual  loose  and 
general  manner  of  stating  the  sublapsarian  doctrine,  that  the  whole- 
race  having  fallen  in  Adam,  and  become  justly  liable  to  eternal 
death,  God  might,  without  any  impeachment  of  his  justice,  in  the 
exercise  of  his  sovereign  grace,  appoint  some  to  life  and  salvation 
by  Christ,  and  leave  the  others  to  their  deserved  punishment.  But 
this  is  a  false  view  of  the  case,  built  upon  the  false  assumption  that 
the  whole  race  were  personally  and  individually,  in  consequence 
of  Adam's  fall,  absolutely  liable  to  eternal  death.  That  very  fact 
which  is  the  foundation  of  the  whole  scheme,  is  easy  to  be  refuted 
on  the  clearest  authority  of  Scripture  ;  whilst  not  a  passage  can  be 
adduced,  we  may  boldly  affirm,  which  sanctions  any  such  doctrine. 

"  The  wages  of  sin  is  death."  That  the  death  which  is  the  wages 
or  penalty  of  sin  extends  to  eternal  death,  we  have  before  proved. 
But  "  sin  is  the  transgression  of  the  law  ;"  and  in  no  other  light  is 
it  represented  in  Scripture,  when  eternal  death  is  threatened  as  its 
penalty,  than  as  the  act  of  a  rational  being  sinning  against  a  law 
known  or  knowable  ;  and  as  an  act  avoidable,  and  not  forced  or 
necessary. 

Taking  these  principles,  let  them  be  applied  to  the  case  before  us. 

The  scheme  of  predestination  in  question  contemplates  the  human 
race  as  fallen  in  Adam.  It  must,  therefore,  contemplate  them 
either  as  seminally  in  Adam,  not  being  yet  born;  or  as  to  be 
actually  born  into  the  world. 

In  the  former  case,  the  only  actual  beings  to  be  charged  with 
sin,  "  the  transgression  of  the  law,"  were  Adam  and  Eve  ;  for  the 
rest  of  the  human  race  not  being  actually  existent,  were  not  capable 
of  transgressing ;  or  if  they  were,  in  a  vague  sense,  capable  of  it  by 
virtue  of  the  federal  character  of  Adam  ;  yet  then  only  as  potential, 
and  not  as  actual  beings,  beings,  as  the  logicians  say,  in  posse,  not 
in  esse.  Our  first  parents  rendered  themselves  liable  to  eternal 
death.  This  is  granted ;  and  had  they  died  "  in  the  day"  they 
sinned,  which,  but  for  the  introduction  of  a  system  of  mercy  and 
long  suffering,  and  the  appointment  of  a  new  kind  of  probation,  for 
any  thing  that  appears,  they  must  have  done,  the  human  race  would 
have  perished  with  them,  and  the  only  conscious  sinners  would  have 
been  the  only  conscious  sufferers  But  then  this  lays  no  foundation 
for  election  and  reprobation ; — the  whole  race  would  thus  have 
perished  without  the  vouchsafement  of  mercy  to  any. 

This  predestination  must,  therefore,  respect  the  human  race 
fallen  in  Adam,  as  to  be  born  actually,  and  to  have  a  real  as  well 
as  a  potential  existence ;  and  the  doctrine  will  be,  that  the  race  so 
contemplated  were  made  unconditionally  liable  to  eternal  death. 

-j 


'-!  I  HEULOGIt'AL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

In  this  case  the  decree  takes  effect  immediately  upon  the  fall,  and 
determines  the  condition  of  every  individual,  in  respect  to  his  being- 
elected  from  this  common  misery,  or  his  being  left  in  it ;  and  it  rests 
its  plea  of  justice  upon  the  assumed  fact,  that  every  man  is  absolutely 
liable  to  eternal  death  wholly  and  entirely  for  the  sin  of  Adam,  a 
sin  to  which  he  was  not  a  consenting  party,  because  he  was  not  in 
actual  existence.  But  if  eternal  death  be  the  "  wages  of  sin ;"  and 
the  sin  which  receives  such  wages  be  the  transgression  of  a  law  by 
a  voluntary  agent,  (and  this  is  the  rule  as  laid  down  by  God  him- 
self,) then  on  no  scriptural  principle  is  the  human  race  to  be  con- 
sidered absolutely  liable  to  personal  and  conscious  eternal  death  for 
the  sin  of  Adam  ;  and  so  the  very  ground  assumed  by  the  advocates 
of  this  theory  is  unfounded. 

But  perhaps  they  will  bring  into  consideration  the  foreknowledge 
of  actual  transgression  as  contemplated  by  the  decree,  though  this 
notion  is  repudiated  by  Calvin,  and  the  rigid  divines  of  his  school ; 
but  we  reply  to  this,  that  either  the  sin  of  Adam  was  a  sufficient 
reason  for  the  actual  infliction  of  a  sentence  of  eternal  death  upon 
his  descendants,  or  it  was  not.  If  not,  then  no  man  will  be  punished 
with  eternal  death,  as  the  consequence  of  Adam's  sin,  and  that 
sentence  will  rest  upon  actual  transgressions  alone.  If,  then,  this 
be  allowed,  there  comes  in  an  important  inquiry :  Are  the  actual 
transgressions  of  the  non-elect  evitable,  or  necessary  1  If  the  former, 
then  even  the  reprobate,  without  the  grace  of  Christ,  which  they 
cannot  have,  because  he  died  not  for  them,  may  avoid  all  sin,  and 
consequently  keep  the  whole  law  of  God,  and  claim,  though  still 
reprobates,  to  be  justified  by  their  works.  But  if  sin  be  unavoidable 
and  necessary  as  to  them,  in  consequence  both  of  the  corrupt 
nature  they  have  derived  from  Adam,  and  the  withholding  of  that 
sanctifying  influence  which  can  be  imparted  only  to  the  elect,  for 
whom  alone  Christ  died,  how  are  they  to  be  proved  justhj  liable,  on 
that  account,  to  eternal  death  ]  This  is  the  penalty  of  sin,  of  sin  as 
the  transgression  of  the  law  ;  but  then  law  is  given  only  to  creatures 
in  a  state  of  trial,  either  to  those  who,  from  their  unimpaired  poAvers, 
are  able  to  keep  it ;  or  to  those  to  whom  is  made  the  promise  of 
gracious  assistance,  upon  their  asking  it,  in  order  that  they  may  be 
enabled  to  obey  the  will  of  God ;  and  in  no  case  are  those  to  whom 
God  issues  his  commands  supposed  in  Scripture  to  be  absolutely 
incapable  of  obedience,  much  less  liable  to  be  punished,  without 
remedy,  for  not  obeying,  if  so  incapacitated.  This  would,  indeed, 
make  the  Divine  Being  a  hard  master,  "  reaping  where  he  has  not 
sown ;"  which  is  the  language  only  of  the  "wicked  servant ;"  and 
therefore  to  be  abhorred  by  all  good  men.     But  if  a  point  so 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  125 

obviously  at  variance  with  truth  and  equity  be  maintained,  the 
doctrine  comes  to  this,  that  men  are  considered,  in  the  Divine 
decree,  as  justly  liable  to  eternal  death,  (their  actual  sins  being 
foreseen,)  because  they  have  been  placed  by  some  previous  decree, 
or  higher  branch  of  the  same  decree,  in  circumstances  which 
necessitate  them  to  sin :  a  doctrine  which  raises  sublapsarianism 
into  supralapsarianism  itself.  This  is  not  the  view  which  God  gives 
us  of  his  own  justice ;  and  it  is  contradicted  by  every  notion  of 
justice  which  has  ever  obtained  among  men  :  nor  is  it  at  all  relieved 
by  the  subtilty  of  Zanchius  and  others,  who  distinguish  between 
being  necessitated  to  sin,  and  being  forced  to  sin  ;  and  argue,  that: 
because  in  sinning  the  reprobate  follow  the  motions  of  their  own 
will,  they  are  justly  punishable  ;  though  in  this  they  fulfil  the  pre- 
destination of  God.  The  true  question  is,  and  it  is  not  at  all 
affected  by  such  merely  verbal  distinctions,  Can  the  reprobate  do 
otherwise  than  sin,  and  could  they  ever  do  otherwise  1  They  sin 
willingly,  it  is  said.  This  is  granted;  but  could  they  ever  will 
otherwise  1  The  will  is  but  one  of  many  diseased  powers  of  the  soul. 
Is  there,  as  to  them,  any  cure  for  this  disease  of  the  will  1  According 
to  this  scheme,  there  is  not ;  and  they  will  from  necessity,  as  well 
as  act  from  necessity ;  so  that  the  difficulty,  though  thrown  a  step 
backward,  remains  in  full  force. 

In  support  of  their  notion,  that  the  penalty  attached  to  original 
sin  is  eternal  death,  they  allege,  it  is  true,  that  the  apostle  Paul 
represents  all  men  under  condemnation  in  consequence  of  their 
connexion  with  the  first  Adam ;  and  attributes  the  salvation  of  those 
who  are  rescued  from  the  ruin,  only  to  the  obedience  of  the  second 
Adam.  This  is  granted ;  but  it  will  not  avail  to  establish  their 
position  that,  the  human  race  being  all  under  an  absolute  sentence 
of  condemnation  to  eternal  death,  Almighty  God,  in  the  exercise  of 
his  sovereign  grace,  elected  a  part  of  them  to  salvation,  and  left  the 
remainder  to  the  justice  of  their  previous  sentence. 

For,  1.  Supposing  that  the  whole  human  race  wrere  under  con- 
demnation in  their  sense,  this  will  not  account  for  the  punishment 
of  those  who  reject  the  Gospel.  Their  rejecting  the  Gospel  is 
represented  in  Scripture  as  the  sole  cause  of  their  condemnation^ 
and  never  merely  as  an  aggravating  cause,  as  though  they  were 
under  an  irreversible  previous  sentence  of  death,  and  that  this  refusal 
of  the  Gospel  only  heightened  a  previously  certain  and  inevitable 
punishment.  An  aggravated  cause  of  condemnation  it  is ;  but  for 
this  reason,  that  it  is  the  rejection  of  a  remedy,  and  an  abuse  of 
mercy,  neither  of  which  could  have  any  place  in  a  previously  fixed 
condition  of  reprobation.     If,  therefore,  it  is  true,  that  "  this  is  the 


126  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

condemnation,  that  light  is  come  into  the  world,  and  men  love 
darkness  rather  than  light,"  we  must  conclude,  that  the  previous 
state  of  condemnation  was  not  irremediable  and  unalterable,  or  this 
circumstance,  the  rejection  "  of  the  light,"  or  revelation  of  mercy 
in  the  Gospel,  could  not  be  their  condemnation. 

2.  Leaving  the  meaning  of  the  apostle  in  Rom.  v,  out  of  our 
consideration  for  a  moment,  the  Scriptures  never  place  the  final 
condemnation  of  men  upon  the  ground  of  Adam's  offence,  and 
their  connexion  with  him.  Actual  sin  forms  the  ground  of  every 
reproving  charge  ;  of  every  commination ;  and,  beyond  all  doubt, 
of  the  condemnatory  sentence  at  the  day  of  judgment.  To  what 
ought  we  to  refer,  as  explaining  the  true  cause  of  the  eternal  pun- 
ishment of  any  portion  of  our  race,  but  to  the  proceedings  of  that 
day,  when  that  eternal  punishment  is  to  be  awarded  1  Of  the  reason 
of  this  proceeding,  of  the  facts  to  be  charged,  and  of  the  sins  to  be 
punished,  we  have  very  copious  information  in  the  Scriptures  ;  but 
these  are  evil  works,  and  disbelief  of  the  Gospel.  Nowhere  is  it  said, 
or  even  hinted  in  the  most  distant  manner,  that  men  will  be  sen- 
tenced to  eternal  death,  at  that  day,  either  because  of  Adam's  sin, 
or  because  their  connexion  with  Adam  made  them  inevitably  cor- 
rupt in  nature,  and  unholy  in  conduct ;  from  which  effects  they 
could  not  escape,  because  God  had  from  eternity  resolved  to  deny 
them  the  grace  necessary  to  this  end. 

3.  The  true  view  of  the  apostle's  doctrine  in  Rom.  v,  is  to  be 
ascertained,  not  by  making  partial  extracts  from  his  discourse  ;  but 
by  taking  the  argument  entire,  and  in  all  its  parts. 

The  Calvinists  assume,  that  the  apostle  represents  what  the  penal 
condition  of  the  human  race  would  have  been  had  not  Christ  in- 
terposed as  our  Redeemer.  Here  is  one  of  their  great  and  leading 
mistakes ;  for  St.  Paul  does  not  touch  this  point.  The  Calvinist 
assumes,  that  the  whole  race  of  men,  but  for  the  decree  of  election, 
would  not  only  have  come  into  actual  being,  but  have  been  actually 
and  individually  punished  for  ever ;  and,  on  this  assumption,  endea- 
vours to  justify  his  doctrine  of  the  arbitrary  selection  of  a  part  of 
mankind  to  grace  and  salvation,  the  other  being  left  in  the  state  in 
which  they  were  found.  Even  this  is  contrary  to  other  parts  of 
their  own  system ;  for  the  reprobate  are  placed  in  an  infinitely 
worse  condition  than  had  they  been  merely  thus  left  without  a  share 
in  Christ's  redemption ;  because,  even  according  to  Calvinistic 
interpreters  their  condemnation  is  fearfully  aggravated ;  and  by 
that  which  they  have  no  means  of  avoiding,  by  actual  sin  and  un- 
belief. But  the  assumption  itself  is  wholly  imaginary.  For  the 
apostle  speaks  not  of  what  the  human  race  would  have  been,  that, 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  127 

is,  he  affirms  nothing  as  to  their  penal  condition,  in  case  Christ  had 
not  undertaken  the  office  of  Redeemer ;  but  he  looks  at  their  moral 
state  and  penal  condition,  as  the  case  actually  stands :  in  other 
words,  he  takes  the  state  of  man  as  it  was  actually  established  after 
the  fall,  as  recorded  in  the  book  of  Genesis.  No  child  of  Adam  was 
actually  born  into  the  world  until  the  promise  of  a  Redeemer  had 
been  given,  and  the  virtue  of  his  anticipated  redemption  had  begun 
to  apply  itself  to  the  case  of  the  fallen  pair ;  consequently,  all  man- 
kind are  born  under  a  constitution  of  mercy,  which  actually  existed 
before  their  birth.  What  the  race  v/ould  have  been,  had  not  the 
redeeming  plan  been  brought  in,  the  Scriptures  nowhere  tell  us, 
except  that  a  sentence  of  death  to  be  executed  "  in  the  day"  in 
which  the  first  pair  sinned,  was  the  sanction  of  the  law  under  which 
they  were  placed ;  and  it  is  great  presumption  to  assume  it  as  a 
truth,  that  they  would  have  multiplied  their  species  only  for  eternal 
destruction.  That  the  race  would  have  been  propagated  under  an 
absolute  necessity  of  sinning,  and  of  being  made  eternally  miserable, 
Ave  may  boldly  affirm  to  be  impossible ;  because  it  supposes  an 
administration  contradicted  by  every  attribute  which  the  Scriptures 
ascribe  to  God.  What  the  actual  state  of  the  human  race  is,  in 
consequence  both  of  the  fall  of  Adam  and  of  the  interposition  of 
Christ ;  of  the  imputation  of  the  effects  of  the  offence  of  the  one, 
and  of  the  obedience  of  the  other  ;  is  the  only  point  to  which  our 
inquiries  can  go,  and  to  which,  indeed,  the  argument  of  the  apostle 
is  confined. 

There  is,  it  is  true,  an  imputation  of  the  consequences  of  Adam's 
sin  to  his  posterity,  independent  of  their  personal  offences  ;  but  we 
can  only  ascertain  what  these  consequences  are  by  referring  to  the 
apostle  himself.  One  of  these  consequences  is  asserted  explicitly, 
and  others  are  necessarily  implied  in  this  chapter  and  in  other  parts 
of  his  writings.  That  which  is  here  explicitly  asserted  is,  that 
death  passed  upon  all  men,  though  they  have  not  sinned  after  the 
similitude  of  Adam's  transgression,  that  is,  not  personally ;  and 
therefore  this  death  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  result  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression alone,  and  of  our  having  been  so  far  "  constituted  sinners" 
in  him,  as  to  be  liable  to  it.  But  then  the  death  of  which  he  here 
speaks,  is  the  death  of  the  body ;  for  his  argument,  that  "  death 
reigned  from  Adam  to  Moses,"  obliges  us  to  understand  him  as 
speaking  of  the  visible  and  known  fact,  that  men  in  those  ages  died 
as  to  the  body,  since  he  could  not  intend  to  say  that  all  the  genera- 
tions of  men,  from  Adam  to  Moses,  died  eternally.  The  death  of 
the  body,  then,  is  the  first  effect  of  the  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  to 
his  descendants,  as  stated  in  this  chapter.    A  second  is  necessarily 


1®8  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

implied  ;  a  state  of  spiritual  death, — the  being  born  into  the  world 
with  a  corrupt  nature,  always  tending  to  actual  offence.     This  is 
known  to  be  the  apostle's  opinion,  from  other  parts  of  his  writings  ; 
but  that  passage  in  this  chapter  in  which  it  is  necessarily  implied, 
is  verse  16  :  "The  free  gift  is  of  many  offences  unto  justification." 
If  men  need  justification  of  "  many  offences ;"  if  all  men  need  this, 
and  that  under  a  dispensation  of  help  and  spiritual  healing ;  then 
the  nature  which  universally  leads  to  offences  so  numerous  must  be 
inherently  and  universally  corrupt.     A  third  consequence  is  a  con- 
ditional liability  to  eternal  death ;  for  that  state  which  makes  us 
liable  to  actual  sin,  makes  us  also  liable  to  actual  punishment.   But 
this  is  conditional,  not  absolute ;  for  since  the  apostle  makes  the 
obedience  of  Christ  available  to  the  forgiveness  of  the  "  many 
offences"  we  may  commit  in  consequence  of  the  corrupt  nature  we 
have  derived  from  Adam,  and  extends  this  to  all  men,  they  can  only 
perish  by  their  own  fault.     Now  beyond  these  three  effects  we  do 
not  find  that  the  apostle  carries  the  consequence  of  Adam's  sin. 
Of  unpardoned  "  offences"  eternal  death  is  the  consequence  ;  but 
these  are  personal.     Of  the  sin  of  Adam,  imputed,  these  are  the 
consequences, — the  death  of  the  body, — and  our  introduction  into 
the  world  with  a  nature  tending  to  actual  offences,  and  a  condi- 
tional liability  to  punishment.     But  both  are  connected  with  a 
remedy  as  extensive  as  the  disease.     For  the  first,  the  resurrection 
from  the  dead  ;  for  the  other,  the  healing  of  grace  and  the  promise 
of  pardon,  and  thus  though  "  condemnation"  has  passed  upon  "  all 
men"  yet  the  free  gift  unto  justification  of  life  passes  upon  "  all  men" 
also, — the  same  general  terms  being  used  by  the  apostle  in  each 
case.     The  effects  of  "  the  free  gift"  are  not  immediate,  the  reign 
of  death  remains  till  the  resurrection ;  but  "  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive,"  and  it  is  every  man's  own  fault,  not  his  fate,  if  his 
resurrection  be  not  a  happy  one.     The  corrupt  nature  remains  till 
the  healing  is  applied  by  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  but  it  is  provided,  and 
is  actually  applied  in  the  case  of  all  those  dying  in  infancy,  as  we 
have  already  showed; (9)  whilst  justification  and  regeneration  are 
offered,  through  specified  means  and  conditions,  to  all  who  are  of 
the  age  of  reason  and  choice,  and  thus  the  sentence  of  eternal  death 
may  be  reversed.     What  then  becomes  of  the  premises  in  the  sub- 
lapsarian  theory  which  we  have  been  examining,  that  in  Adam  all 
men  are  absolutely  condemned  to  eternal  death  1    Had  Christ  not 
undertaken  human  redemption,  we  have  no  proof,  no  indication  in 
Scripture,  that  for  Adam's  sin  any  but  the  actually  guilty  pair  would 
have  been  doomed  to  this  condemnation  ;  and  though  now  the  race 
(9)  See  vol.  ii,  chap.  18. 


SECOND,  j  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTE'S.  129 

having  become  actually  existent,  is  for  this  sin,  and  for  the  demon- 
stration of  God's  hatred  of  sin  in  general,  involved,  through  a  federal 
relation  and  by  an  imputation  of  Adam's  sin,  in  the  effects  above 
mentioned  ;  yet  a  universal  remedy  is  provided. 

But  we  are  not  to  be  confined  even  to  this  view  of  the  grace  of 
God,  when  we  speak  of  actual  offences.  Here  the  case  is  even 
strengthened.  The  redemption  of  Christ  extends  not  merely  to  the 
removal  of  the  evils  laid  upon  us  by  the  imputation  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression ;  but  to  those  which  are  the  effects  of  our  own  personal 
choice — to  the  forgiveness  of  "  many  offences,"  upon  our  repent- 
ance and  faith,  however  numerous  and  aggravated  they  may  be  ; — 
to  the  bestowing  of  "  abundance  of  grace  and  of  the  gift  of  right- 
eousness ;" — and  not  merely  to  the  reversal  of  the  sentence  of  death, 
but  to  our  "  reigning  in  life  by  Jesus  Christ :"  so  that  "  where  sin 
abounded  grace  did  much  more  abound  ;  that  as  sin  hath  reigned 
unto  death,  even  so  might  grace  reign  through  righteousness,  unto 
eternal  life .-" — which  phrase,  in  the  New  Testament,  does  never 
mean  less  than  the  glorification  of  the  bodies  and  souls  of  believers 
in  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  in  the  presence  and  enjoyment  of  the 
eternal  glory  of  Christ. 

So  utterly  without  foundation  is  the  leading  assumption  in  the 
sublapsarian  scheme,  that  the  decree  of  election  and  reprobation 
finds  the  human  race  in  a  state  of  common  and  absolute  liability  to 
personal  eternal  punishment ;  and  that  by  making  a  sovereign 
selection  of  a  part  of  mankind,  God  does  no  injustice  to  the  rest  by 
passing  them  by.  The  word  of  God  asserts  no  such  doctrine  as 
the  absolute  condemnation  of  the  race  to  eternal  death,  merely  for 
Adam's  offence  ;  and  if  it  did,  the  merciful  result  of  the  obedience 
of  Christ  is  declared  to  be  not  only  as  extensive  as  the  evil,  in  re- 
spect of  the  number  of  persons  so  involved  ;  but  in  "  grace"  to  be 
more  abounding.  Finally,  this  assumption  falls  short  of  the  purpose 
for  which  it  is  made  ;  because  the  mere  "  passing  by"  of  a  part  of 
the  race,  already,  according  to  them,  under  eternal  condemnation, 
and  which  they  contend  inflicts  no  injustice  upon  them,  does  not. 
account  for  their  additional  and  aggravated  punishment  for  doing 
what  they  had  never  the  natural  or  dispensed  power  of  avoiding, — 
breaking  God's  holy  laws,  and  rejecting  his  Gospel.  Upon  a  close 
examination  of  the  sublapsarian  scheme,  it  will  be  found,  therefore, 
to  involve  all  the  leading  difficulties  of  the  Calvinistic  theory  as  it  is 
broadly  exhibited  by  Calvin  himself.  In  both  cases  reprobation  is 
grounded  on  an  act  of  mere  will,  resting  on  no  reason  :  it  respects 
not  in  either,  as  its  primary  cause,  the  demerit  of  the  creature  ;  and 
it  punishes  eternally  without  personal  guilt,  arising  either  from  actual 

vor(.  J II  17 


130  TREGLoGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

sin,  or  from  the  rejection  of  the  Gospel.  Both  unite  in  making 
sin  a  necessary  result  of  the  circumstances  in  which  God  has  placed 
a  great  part  of  mankind,  which,  by  no  effort  of  theirs,  can  be  avoid- 
ed ;  or  what  is  the  same  thing-,  which  they  shall  never  be  disposed 
to  avoid  ;  and  how  either  of  these  schemes,  in  strict  consequence, 
can  escape  the  charge  of  making  God  the  author  of  sin,  which  the 
Synod  of  Dort  acknowledges  to  be  "  blasphemy,"  is  inconceivable. 
For  how  does  it  alter  the  case  of  the  reprobate,  whether  the  fall  of 
Adam  himself  was  necessitated,  or  whether  he  acted  freely  %  They, 
at  least,  are  necessitated  to  sin  ;  they  come  into  the  world  under  a 
necessitating  constitution,  which  is  the  result  of  an  act  to  which 
they  gave  no  consent ;  and  their  case  differs  nothing,  except  in 
circumstances  which  do  not  alter  its  essential  character,  from  that 
of  beings  immediately  created  by  God  with  a  nature  necessarily  pro- 
ducing sinful  acts,  and  to  counteract  which  there  is  no  remedy: — ■ 
a  case  which  few  have  been  bold  enough  to  suppose. 

The  different  views  of  the  doctrine  of  predestination,  as  stated 
above,  greatly  agitated  the  Protestant  world,  from  the  time  of  Cal- 
vin to  the  sitting  of  the  celebrated  Synod  of  Dort,  whose  decisions 
on  this  point,  having  been  received  as  a  standard  by  several  churches 
and  by  many  theologians,  may  next  be  properly  introduced ;  al- 
though, after  what  has  been  said,  they  call  only  for  brief  remark. 

"  The  Judgment  of  the  Synod  of  the  Reformed  Belgic  churches," 
to  which  many  divines  of  note  of  other  reformed  churches  were 
admitted,  "  on  the  articles  controverted  in  the  Belgic  churches," 
was  drawn  up  in  Latin,  and  read  in  the  great  church  at  Dort,  in 
the  year  1619  ;  and  a  translation  into  English  of  this  "  Judgment," 
with  the  Synod's  "  Rejection  of  Errors,"  was  published  in  the  same 
year.(l)  This  translation  having  become  scarce,  or  not  being 
known  to  Mr.  Scott,  he  published  a  new  translation  in  1818,  from 
which,  as  being  in  more  modern  English,  and,  as  far  as  I  have 
compared  it,  unexceptionably  faithful,  I  shall  take  the  extracts 
necessary  to  exhibit  the  Synod's  decision  on  the  point  before  us. 

Art.  1.  "As  all  men  have  sinned  in  Adam,  and  have  become 
exposed  to  the  curse  and  eternal  death,  God  would  have  done  no 
injustice  to  any  one,  if  he  had  determined  to  leave  the  whole  human 
race  under  sin  and  the  curse,  and  to  condemn  them  on  account  of 
sin  ;  according  to  the  words  of  the  apostle,  '  all  the  world  is  become 
guilty  before  God,'  Rom.  iii,  1 9.  '  All  have  sinned,  and  come  short  of 
the  glory  of  God,'  23  ;  and  '  the  wages  of  sin  is  death,'  Rom.  vi,  23." 

The  Synod  here  assumes  that  all  men,  in  consequence  of  Adam's 
sin.  have  become  exposed  to  the  curse  of  "  eternal  death  ;"  and  they 
(1)  London,  printed  by  John  Bill 


SECOND,  j  "IIIEOLOGlcAL  INSTITUTES.  i-il 

quote  passages  to  prove  it,  which  manifestly  prove  nothing  to  the 
point.  The  two  first  speak  of  actual  sin  ;  the  third,  of  the  wages, 
or  penalty  of  actual  sin,  as  the  context  of  each  will  show.  The 
very  texts  adduced,  show  how  totally  at  a  loss  the  Synod  was  for 
any  thing  like  scriptural  evidence  of  this  strange  doctrine  ;  which, 
however,  as  we  have  seen,  would  not,  if  true,  help  them  through 
their  difficulties,  seeing  it  leaves  the  punishment  of  the  reprobate 
for  actual  sin  and  for  disbelief  of  the  Gospel,  still  unaccounted  for 
on  every  principle  of  justice. 

Art.  4.  "  They  who  believe  not  the  Gospel,  on  them  the  wrath 
of  God  remaineth ;  but  those  who  receive  it,  and  embrace  the 
Saviour  Jesus  with  a  true  and  living  faith ;  are,  through  him,  de- 
livered from  the  wrath  of  God,  and  receive  the  gift  of  everlasting  life." 

To  this  there  is  nothing  to  object ;  only  it  is  to  be  observed,  that 
those  who  are  not  elected  to  eternal  life  out  of  the  common  mass, 
are  not,  according  to  this  article,  merely  left  and  passed  by ;  but 
are  brought  under  an  obligation  of  believing  the  Gospel,  which, 
nevertheless,  is  no  "  good  news"  to  them,  and  in  which  they  have 
no  interest  at  all ;  and  yet,  in  default  of  believing,  "  the  wrath  of 
God  abideth  upon  them."  Thus  there  is,  in  fact,  no  alternative 
lor  them.  They  cannot  believe,  or  else  it  would  follow  that  those 
reprobated  might  be  saved ;  and,  therefore,  the  wrath  of  God 
"  abideth  upon  them,"  for  no  fault  of  their  own.  This,  however, 
the  next  article  denies. 

Art.  5.  "The  cause  or  fault  of  this  unbelief,  as  also  of  all  other 
sins,  is,  by  no  means  in  God ;  but  in  man.  But  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ  and  salvation  by  him,  is  the  free  gift  of  God.  \  By  grace  are 
ye  saved  through  faith,  and  that  not  of  yourselves,  it  is  the  gift  of 
God,'  Eph.  ii,  8.  In  like  manner,  '  it  is  given  to  you  to  believe  in 
Christ,'  Phil,  i,  29." 

These  passages  would  be  singular  proofs  that  the  fault  of  unbe- 
lief is  in  men  themselves,  did  not  the  next  article  explain  the  con- 
nexion between  them  and  the  premises  in  the  minds  of  the  Synodists. 
A  much  more  appropriate  text,  but  a  rather  difficult  one  on  their 
theory,  would  have  been,  "  ye  have  not,  because  ye  ask  not." 

Art.  6.  "  That  some,  in  time,  have  faith  given  them  by  God,  and 
others  have  it  not  given,  proceeds  from  his  eternal  decree ;  for  '■  known 
unto  God  are  all  his  ivorfys  from  the  beginning  of  the  world?  Acts 
xv,  18.  According  to  which  decree,  he  gradually  softens  the  hearts 
of  the  elect,  however  hard,  and  he  bends  them  to  believe  ;  but  the 
non-elect  he  leaves,  in  just  judgment,  to  their  own  perversity  and 
hardness.  And  here  especially,  a  deep  discrimination,  at  the  same 
time  both  merciful  and  just,  a  discrimination  of  men  equally  lost. 


ioii  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

opens  itself  to  us ;  or  that  decree  of  election  and  reprobation  which 
is  revealed  in  the  word  of  God ;  which  as  perverse,  impure,  and 
unstable  persons  do  wrest  to  their  own  destruction,  so  it  affords 
ineffable  consolation  to  holy  and  pious  souls." 

To  this  article  the  Synod  appends  no  Scripture  proofs ;  which 
if  the  doctrines  it  contains  were,  as  the  Synodists  say,  "  revealed  in 
the  word  of  God,"  would  not  have  been  wanting.  The  passage 
which  stands  in  the  middle  of  the  article  could  scarcely  be  intended 
as  a  proof,  since  it  would  equally  apply  to  any  other  doctrine  which 
does  not  shut  out  the  prescience  of  God.  The  doctrine  of  the  two 
articles  just  quoted,  will  be  seen  by  taking  them  together.  The 
position  laid  down  is,  that  "  the  fault"  of  not  believing  the  Gospel 
is  "  in  man."  The  alleged  proof  of  this  is,  that  faith  is  the  gift  of 
God.  But  this  only  proves  that  the  fault  of  not  believing  is  in  man, 
just  as  it  allows  that  God,  the  giver  of  faith,  is  willing  to  give  faith 
to  those  who  have  it  not,  and  that  they  will  not  receive  it.  In  no 
other  way  can  it  prove  the  faultiness  of  man  ;  for  to  what  end  are 
we  taught  that  faith  is  the  gift  of  God  in  order  to  prove  the  fault  of 
not  believing  to  be  in  man,  if  God  will  not  bestow  the  gift,  and  if 
man  cannot  believe  without  such  bestowment  1  This,  however,  is 
precisely  what  the  Synod  teaches.  It  argues,  that  faith  is  the  gift 
of  God ;  that  it  is  only  given  to  "  some ;"  and  that  this  proceeds 
from  God's  "  eternal  decree."  So  that,  by  virtue  of  this  decree, 
he  gives  faith  to  some,  and  withholds  it  from  others,  who  are, 
thereupon,  left  without  the  power  of  believing ;  and  for  this  act  of 
God,  therefore,  and  not  for  a  fault  of  their  own,  they  are  punished 
eternally.  And  yet  the  Synod  calls  this  a  "just  judgment ;  affording 
ineffable  consolation  to  holy  souls,"  and  a  "  doctrine  only  rejected 
by  the  perverse  and  impure  !" 

As  we  have  already  quoted  and  commented  on  the  7th  and  8th 
articles  on  election,  we  proceed  to 

Art.  10.  "  Now  the  cause  of  this  gratuitous  election  is  the  sole 
good  pleasure  of  God ;  not  consisting  in  this,  that  he  elected  into 
the  condition  of  salvation  certain  qualities  or  human  actions,  from 
all  that  were  possible  ;  but  in  that,  out  of  the  common  multitude  of 
sinners,  he  took  to  himself  certain  persons  as  his  peculiar  property, 
according  to  the  Scripture,  '  for  the  children  being  not  born,  neither 
having  done  any  good  or  evil,  &c,  it  is  said  (that  is  to  Rebecca)  the 
elder  shall  serve  the  younger ;  even  as  it  is  written,  Jacob  have  I 
loved;  but  Esau  have  I  hated,'  Rom.  ix,  11-13.  'And  as  many 
as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life  believed,'  Acts  xiii,  48." 

Thus  the  ground  of  this  election  is  resolved  wholly  into  the 
"  good  pleasure  of  God,"  (est  solum  Dei  beneplacitum)  "  having  no 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  1&» 

respect,  as  to  its  reason,  or  condition,  though  it  may  have  as  to 
its  end,  to  any  foreseen  faith,  obedience  of  faith,  or  any  other  good 
quality  and  disposition,"  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  preceding  article. 
Let  us,  then,  see  how  the  case  stands  with  the  reprobate. 

Art.  15.  "Moreover,  Holy  Scripture  doth  illustrate  and  com- 
mend to  us  this  eternal  and  free  grace  of  our  election,  in  this  more 
especially,  that  it  doth  also  testify  all  men  not  to  be  elected ;  but 
that  some  are  non-elect,  or  passed  by  in  the  eternal  election  of  God  : 
whom,  truly,  God,  from  most  free,  just,  irreprehensible,  and  im- 
mutable good  pleasure,  decreed  to  leave  in  the  common  misery  into 
which  they  had,  by  their  oim  fault,  cast  themselves,  and  not  to  bestow 
on  them  living  faith,  and  the  grace  of  conversion ;  but  having  left 
them  in  their  own  ways,  and  under  just  judgment,  at  length,  not 
only  on  account  of  their  unbelief,  but  also  of  all  their  other  sins,  to 
condemn,  and  eternally  punish  them  for  the  manifestation  of  his 
own  justice.  And  this  is  the  decree  of  reprobation  which  deter- 
mines that  God  is  in  no  wise  the  author  of  sin ;  (which,  to  be 
thought  of,  is  blasphemy  ;)  but  a  tremendous,  irreprehensible,  just 
judge  and  avenger." 

Thus  we  hear  the  Synodists  confessing,  in  the  same  breath  in 
which  they  plausibly  represent  reprobation  as  a  mere  passing  by  and 
leaving  men  "  in  the  common  misery,"  that  the  reprobate  are  pun- 
ishable for  their  "unbelief  and  other  sins,"  and  so  this  decree 
imports,  therefore,  much  more  than  leaving  men  in  the  "  common 
misery."  For  this  "  common  misery"  can  mean  no  more  than  the 
misery  common  to  all  mankind  by  the  sin  of  Adam,  into  which  his 
fall  plunged  the  elect,  as  well  as  the  reprobate ;  and  to  be  "  left" 
in  it,  must  be  understood  of  being  left  to  the  sole  consequences  of 
that  offence.  Now,  were  it  even  to  be  conceded  that  these  conse- 
quences extend  to  personal  and  conscious  eternal  punishment,  which 
has  been  disproved ;  yet,  even  then,  their  decree  has  a  much  more 
formidable  aspect,  terrible  and  repulsive  as  this  alone  would  be. 
For  we  are  expressly  told,  that  God  not  only  "  decreed  to  leave 
them  in  this  misery,"  but  "  not  to  bestow  on  them  living  faith,  and 
the  grace  of  conversion;"  and  then  to  condemn,  and  eternally 
punish  them,  "  on  account  of  their  unbelief,"  which,  by  their  own 
showing,  these  reprobates  could  not  avoid  ;  and  for  "  all  their  other 
sins,"  which  they  could  not  but  commit,  since  it  was  "  decreed"  to 
deny  to  them  "  the  grace  of  conversion."  Thus  the  case  of  the 
reprobate  is  deeply  aggravated,  beyond  what  it  could  have  been  if 
they  had  been  merely  "  left  in  the  common  misery  ;"  and  the  Synod 
and  its  followers  have,  therefore,  the  task  of  showing,  how  the 
punishing  of  men  for  what  they  never  could  avoid,  and  which,  if. 


134  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

was  expressly  decreed  they  never  should  avoid,  "  is  a  manifestation 
of  the  justice,"  of  Almighty  God. 

From  the  above  extracts  it  will  be  seen  how  little  reason  Mr. 
Scott  had  to   reprove   Dr.    Heylin  with  "bearing  false  witness 
against  his  neighbour,  (2)  on  account  of  having  given  a  summary 
of  the  eighteen  articles  of  the  Synod,  on  predestination,  in  the  fol- 
lowing words  : — "  That  God,  by  an  absolute  decree,  hath  elected 
to  salvation,  a  very  small  number  of  men,  without  any  regard  to 
their  faith  and  obedience  whatsoever  ;  and  secluded  from  saving 
grace,  all  the  rest  of  mankind,  and  appointed  them  by  the  same 
decree  to  eternal  damnation,  without  any  regard  to  their  infidelity 
and  impenitency."  Whether  Mr.  Scott  understood  this  controversy 
or  not,  Dr.  Heylin  shows,  by  this  summary,  that  he  neither  misap- 
prehended it,  nor  bore  "  false  witness  against  his  neighbour,"  in  so 
stating  it ;  for  as  to  the  stir  made  about  his  rendering  "  mult  kudo" 
a  very  small  number,  this  verbal  inaccuracy  affects  not  the  merits 
of  the  doctrine ;  and  neither  the  Synodists,  nor  any  of  their  fol- 
lowers, ever  allowed  the  elect  to  be  a  very  great  number.     The 
number,  less  or  more,  alters  not  the  doctrine.    With  respect  to  the 
elect,  the  Synod  confesses,  that  the  decree  of  election  has  no  regard, 
as  a  cause,  to  faith  and  obedience  foreseen  in  the  persons  so  elect- 
ed ;  and  with  respect  to  the  reprobate,  although  it  is  not  so  explicit 
in  asserting  that  the  decree  of  reprobation  has  no  regard  to  their 
infidelity  and  impenitency,  the  foregoing  extracts  cannot  possibly 
be  interpreted  into  any  other  meaning.    For  it  is  manifestly  in  vain 
for  the  Synodists  to  attempt,  in  the  1 5th  article,  to  gloss  over  the 
doctrine,  by  saying  that  men  "cast  themselves  into  the  common 
misery  by  their  oivn  fault"  when  they  only  mean,  that  they  were 
cast  into  it  by  Adam  and  by  Ms  fault.     If  they  intended  to  ground 
their  decree  of  reprobation  on  foresight  of  the  personal  offences  of 
the  reprobate,  they  would  have  said  this  in  so  many  words ;  but 
the  materials  of  which  the  Synod  was  composed  forbade  such  a 
declaration ;  and  they  themselves,  in  the  "  Rejection  of  Errors," 
appended  to  their  chapter  "  De  divina  Prcedestinatione"  place  in 
this  list  "  the  errors  of  those  who  teach  that  God  has  not  decreed, 
from  his  own  mere  just  ivill,  to  leave  any  in  the  fall  of  Mam,  and  in 
the  common  state  of  sin  and  damnation,  or  to  pass  them  by  in  the 
communication  of  grace  necessary  to  faith  and  conversion ;"  quoting, 
as  a  proof  of  this  dogma,  "  He  hath  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have 
mercy,  and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth,"  and  giving  no  intimation 
that  they  understand  this  passage  in  any  other  sense  than  Calvin 
and  his  immediate  followers  have  uniformly  affixed  to  it.     What 

(S)  groTT's  Translation  of  the  Articles  of  the  Synod  of  Dort.  pae;e  120. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  *&> 

Dr.  Heylin  has  said  is  here,  then,  abundantly  established ;  for  if  the 
decree  of  reprobation  is  to  be  referred  to  God's  "  mere  will,"  and  it 
its  operation  is  to  leave  the  reprobate  "  in  the  fall  of  Adam"  and 
"to  pass  them  by  in  that  communication  of  grace  which  is  neces- 
sary to  faith  and  conversion,"  the  decree  itself  is  that  which  prevents 
both  penitence  and  faith,  and  stands  upon  some  other  ground  than 
the  personal  infidelity  and  impenitency  of  the  reprobate,  and  cannot 
have  "  any  regard"  to  either,  except  as  a  part  of  its  own  dread 
consequences  :  a  view  of  the  matter  which  the  supralapsarians 
would  readily  admit.  How  their  doctrine,  so  stated  by  themselves, 
could  give  the  Synod  any  reason  to  complain,  as  they  do  in  their 
conclusion,  that  they  were  slandered  by  their  enemies  when  they 
were  charged  with  teaching,  "that  God,  by  the  bare  and  mere 
determination  of  his  will,  without  any  respect  of  the  sin  of  any  man, 
predestinated  and  created  the  greatest  part  of  the  world  to  eternal 
damnation,"  will  not  be  very  obvious  ;  or  why  they  should  startle 
at  the  same  doctrine  in  one  dress  which  they  themselves  have  but 
clothed  in  another.  The  fact  is,  that  the  divisions  in  the  Synod 
obliged  the  leading  members,  who  were  chiefly  stout  supralapsa- 
rians, to  qualify  their  doctrine  somewhat  in  words,  whilst  substan- 
tially it  remained  the  same  ;  but  what  they  lost  by  giving  up  a  few 
words  in  one  place,  they  secured  by  retaining  them  in  another,  or 
by  resorting  to  subtilties  not  obvious  to  the  commonalty.  Of  this 
subtilty,  the  apparent  disclaimer  just  quoted  is  in  proof.  When 
they  seem  to  deny  that  God  reprobates  without  any  respect  to  the 
sin  of  any  man,  they  may  mean  that  he  had  respect  to  the  sin  of 
Adam,  or  to  sin  in  Adam ;  for  they  do  not  deny  that  they  reject 
personal  sin  as  a  ground  of  reprobation.  Even  when  they  appea* 
to  allow  that  God  had,  in  reprobation,  respect  to  the  corruption  of 
human  nature,  or  even  to  personal  transgression,  they  never  confess 
that  God  had  respect  to  sin,  in  either  sense,  as  the  impulsive  or 
meritorious  cause  of  reprobation.  But  the  greatest  subtilty  remains 
behind ;  for  the  Synod  says  nothing,  in  this  complaint  and  apparent 
rejection  of  the  doctrine  charged  upon  them  by  their  adversaries. 
but  what  all  the  supralapsarian  divines  would  say.  These,  as  we. 
have  seen,  make  a  distinction  between  the  two  parts  of  the  decree 
of  reprobation, — preterition  and  predamnation,  the  latter  of 
which,  must  always  have  respect  to  actual  sin ;  and  hence  arises 
their  distinction  between  "  destruction"  and  "  damnation"  For  they 
say,  it  is  one  thing  to  predestinate  and  create  to  damnation,  and 
another  to  predestinate  and  create  to  destruction.  Damnation,  being 
the  sentence  of  a  judge,  must  be  passed  in  consideration  of  sin ; 
but  destruction  may  be  the  act  of  a  sovereign,  and  so  inflicted  by 


136  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

right  of  dominion.  (3)  The  Synod  would  have  disallowed  something 
substantial,  had  they  denied  that  God  created  any  man  to  destruc- 
tion, without  respect  to  sin,  and  were  safe  enough  in  allowing  that 
he  has  created  none,  without  respect  to  sin,  unto  damnation.  But 
among  the  errors  on  predestination,  which  they  formally  "  reject,'* 
and  which  they  place  under  nine  distinct  heads,  thus  attempting  to 
guard  the  pure  and  orthodox  doctrine  as  to  this  point  on  the  right 
hand  and  on  the  left,  they  are  careful  not  to  condemn  the  supra- 
lapsarian  doctrine,  or  to  place  even  its  highest  branches  among  the 
doctrines  disavowed. 

The  doctrine  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  on  these  topics,  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  answers  to  the  12th  and  13th  questions  of  its  large 
catechism  :  "  God's  decrees  are  the  wise,  free,  and  holy  acts  of  the 
counsel  of  his  will ;  whereby,  from  all  eternity,  he  hath,  for  his  own 
glory,  unchangeably  foreordained  whatsoever  comes  to  pass  in  time, 
especially  concerning  angels  and  men" — "  God,  by  an  eternal  and 
immutable  decree,  out  of  his  mere  love,  for  the  praise  of  his  glorious 
grace  to  be  manifested  in  due  time,  hath  elected  some  angels  to 
glory ;  and,  in  Christ,  hath  chosen  some  men  to  eternal  life  and  the 
means  thereof;  and  also,  according  to  his  sovereign  power  and  the 
unsearchable  counsel  of  his  own  will,  (whereby  he  extendeth  or 
withholdeth  favour  as  he  pleaseth,)  hath  passed  by  and  foreordained 
the  rest  to  dishonour  and  wrath,  to  be  for  their  sin  inflicted,  to  the 
praise  of  the  glory  of  his  justice." 

In  this  general  view  there  appears  a  strict  conformity  to  the 
opinions  of  Calvin,  as  before  given.  All  things  are  the  subjects  of 
decree  and  preordination  ;  election  and  reprobation  are  grounded 
upon  the  mere  will  of  God  ;  election  is  the  choosing  men,  not  only 
to  salvation,  but  to  the  means  of  salvation  ;  from  which  the  reprobates 
are  therefore  excluded,  as  passed  by,  and  foreordained  to  wrath ; 
and  yet,  though  the  "  means  of  salvation"  are  never  put  within  their 
reach,  this  wrath  is  inflicted  upon  them  (ifor  their  sin  :"  and  to  the 
praise  of  God's  justice  !  The  church  of  Scotland  adopts,  also,  the 
notion  that  decrees  of  election  and  reprobation  extend  to  angels  as 
well  as  men ;  a  pretty  certain  proof,  that  the  framers  of  this  catechism 
were  not  sublapsarians,  for  as  to  angels,  there  could  be  no  election 
out  of  a,  "  common  misery ;"  and  with  Calvin,  therefore,  they  choose 
to  refer  the  whole  to  the  arbitrary  pleasure  and  will  of  God. — 

(3)  "  Non  solent  enim  supralapsarii  dicere  Deum  quosdam  ad  aeternam  damna- 
tionem  creasse  et  prcedestinasse  ;  eo  quod  damnatio  actum  judicialem  designet,  ac 
proinde  peccati  meritum  pra^supponat ;  sed  malunt  uti  voce  ezitii,  ad  quod  Deus, 
tanquam  absolutusDominus,  jus  habeat  creandiet  destinandi  quoscunque  voluerit.1' 
— Curcellaeus  De  Jure  Dei,  &c,  cap.  x.  See  also  Bishop  Womack's  Calvinistio 
Cabinet,  &c,  p.  394. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  IISSTI T 0TES.  137 

!*  The  angels  who  stood  in  their  integrity,  Paul  calls  elect ;  if  their 
constancy  rested  on  the  Divine  pleasure,  the  defection  of  others 
argues  their  having  been  forsaken :  (direlectos)  a  fact,  for  which 
no  other  cause  can  be  assigned,  than  the  reprobation  hidden  in  the 
secret  counsel  of  God." 

The  ancient  church  of  the  Vaudois,  in  the  valleys  of  Piedmont, 
have  a  confession  of  faith,  bearing  date  A.  D.  1120;  and  which, 
probably,  transmits  the  opinions  of  much  more  ancient  times.  The 
only  article  which  bears  upon  the  extent  of  the  death  of  Christ  is 
drawn  up,  as  might  be  expected  in  an  age  of  the  church  when  it 
was  received,  as  a  matter  almost  entirely  undisputed,  that  Christ 
died  for  the  salvation  of  the  whole  world.  Art.  8.  "  Christ  is  our 
life,  truth,  peace,  and  righteousness;  also  our  pastor,  advocate, 
sacrifice,  and  priest,  who  died  for  the  salvation  of  all  those  that, 
believe,  and  is  risen  again  for  our  justification.'* 

The  Confession  of  Faith,  published  by  the  churches  of  Piedmont 
in  1655,  bears  a  different  character.  In  the  year  1630,  a  plague 
which  was  introduced  from  France  into  these  valleys,  swept  off  all 
the  ministers  but  two,  and  with  them  ended  the  race  of  their  ancient 
barbes,  or  pastors.  (4)  The  Vaudois  were  then  under  the  necessity 
of  applying  to  the  reformed  churches  of  France  and  Geneva  for  a 
supply  of  ministers  ;  and  with  them  came  in  the  doctrine  of  Calvin 
in  an  authorized  form.  It  was  thus  embodied  in  the  Confession  of 
1655.  Art.  11.  "God  saves  from  corruption  and  condemnation 
those  whom  he  has  chosen  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,  not  for 
any  disposition,  faith,  or  holiness,  that  he  foresaw  in  them,  but  of 
his  mere  mercy  in  Jesus  Christ  his  Son :  passing  by  all  the  rest, 
according  to  the  irreprehensible  reason  of  his, free  will  and  justice.'''' 
The  last  clause  is  expressed  in  the  very  words  of  Calvin. 

The  12th  Article  in  the  Confession  of  the  French  churches, 
1558,  is,  in  substance,  Calvinistic,  though  brief  and  guarded  in 
expression.  "  We  believe,  that  out  of  this  general  corruption  and 
condemnation  in  which  all  men  arc  plunged,  God  doth  deliver  them 
whom  he  hath,  in  his  eternal  and  unchangeable  counsel;  chosen  of 
his  mere  goodness  and  mercy,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
without  any  consideration  of  their  works,  leaving  the  rest  in  their 
sins  and  damnable  estate,  that  he  may  show  forth  in  them  his  justice, 
as,  in  the  elect,  he  doth  most  illustriously  declare  the  riches  of  his 
mercy.  For  one  is  not  better  than  another,  until  such  time  as  God 
doth  make  the  difference,  according  to  his  unchangeable  purpose 
which  he  hath  determined  in  Jesus  Christ  before  the  creation  of 

(4)  Sco  "Historical  Defence,  &c,  of  the  Waldenaeg,"  bv  Sim? 

Vol  III  18 


138  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

the  world."(o)  This  confession  was  drawn  up  by  Calvin  himself, 
though  not  in  language  so  strong  as  he  usually  employs ;  which, 
perhaps,  indicates  that  the  majority  of  the  French  pastors  were 
inclined  to  the  sublapsarian  theory,  and  did  not,  in  every  point, 
coincide  with  their  great  master. 

The  Westminster  Confession  gives  the  sentiments  both  of  the 
English  Presbyterian  churches,  and  the  church  of  Scotland.  (6) 
Chap.  3  treats  of  the  predestination. 

"  By  the  decree  of  God,  for  the  manifestation  of  his  glory,  some 
men  and  angels  are  predestinated  unto  everlasting  life,  and  others 
foreordained  to  everlasting  death.  These  angels  and  men  thus 
predestinated  and  foreordained,  are  particularly  and  unchangeably 
designed ;  and  their  number  is  so  certain  and  definite,  that  it  cannot 
cither  be  increased  or  diminished.  Those  of  mankind  that  are 
predestinated  unto  life,  God,  before  the  foundation  of  the  world 
was  laid,  according  to  his  eternal  and  immutable  purpose  and  the- 
secret  counsel  and  good  pleasure  of  his  will,  hath  chosen  in  Christ 
unto  everlasting  glory,  out  of  his  mere  free  grace  and  love,  without 
any  foresight  of  faith  and  good  works,  or  perseverance  in  either  of 
them,  or  any  other  thing  in  the  creature  as  conditions  or  causes 
moving  him  thereunto  ;  and  all  to  the  praise  of  his  glorious  grace. 
As  God  hath  appointed  the  elect  unto  glory,  so  hath  he,  by  the 
eternal  and  most  free  purpose  of  his  will,  foreordained  all  the  means 
thereunto.  Wherefore,  they  who  are  elected,  being  fallen  in  Adam, 
are  redeemed  by  Christ ;  are  effectually  called  unto  faith  in  Christ, 
by  his  Spirit  working  in  due  season  ;  are  justified,  adopted,  sancti- 
fied, and  kept  by  his  power  through  faith  unto  salvation ;  neither 
are  any  other  redeemed  by  Christ,  effectually  called,  justified,  adopt- 
ed, sanctified,  and  saved,  but  the  elect  only.  The  rest  of  mankind 
God  was  pleased,  according  to  the  unsearchable  counsel  of  his  own 
will,  whereby  he  extendeth  or  withholdeth  mercy  as  he  pleaseth, 
for  the  glory  of  his  sovereign  power  over  his  creatures,  to  pass  by,  and 
to  ordain  them  to  dishonour  and  wrath  for  their  sin,  to  the  praise 
of  his  glorious  justice." 

Here  we  have  no  attempts  at  qualification  after  the  example  of 
the  Synod  of  Dort ;  but  the  whole  is  conformed  to  the  higher  and 
most  unmitigated  parts  of  the  Institutes  of  Calvin.  By  the  side  of 
the  Presbyterian  Confession,  the  seventeenth  article  of  the  Church 

(5)  Quick's  "  Synodicon  in  Gallia  Reformata." 

(C)  The  title  of  it  is  "The  Confession  of  Faith  agreed  upon  by  the  Assembly  of 
Divines  at  Westminster,  with  the  assistance  of  Commissioners  from  the  Church 
of  Scotland."  The  date  of  the  ordinance  for  convening  this  assembly  is  1643.  The 
Confession  was  approved  bv  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotrand  in 
1647. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  139 

of  England  must  appear  exceedingly  moderate  ;  and,  as  to  Cahin- 
istic  predestination,  to  say  the  least,  equivocal.  It  never  gave 
satisfaction  to  the  followers  of  Calvin,  who  had  put  his  stronger 
impress  upon  the  Augustinism  which  floated  in  the  minds  of  many 
of  the  divines  of  the  Reformation,  who  generally,  as  appears  from 
the  earliest  Protestant  confessions  and  catechisms,  (7)  thought  fit  to 
recommend  that  either  these  points  should  not  be  touched  at  all,  or 
so  speak  of  them  as  to  admit  great  latitude  of  interpretation,  and 
that,  probably,  in  charitable  respect  to  the  varying  opinions  of  the 
theologians  and  churches  of  the  day.  It  is  of  the  perfected  form 
of  Calvinism  that  Arminius  speaks,  when  he  says,  "  It  neither 
agrees  nor  corresponds  with  the  harmony  of  those  confessions  which 
were  published  together  in  one  volume  at  Geneva,  in  the  name  of 
the  Reformed  and  Protestant  Churches.  If  that  harmony  of  con- 
fessions be  faithfully  consulted,  it  will  appear,  that  many  of  them  do 
not  speak  in  the  same  manner  concerning  predestination ;  that  some 
of  them  only  incidentally  mention  it,  and  that  they  evidently  never 
once  touch  upon  those  heads  of  the  doctrine  which  are  now  in 
great  repute,  and  particularly  urged  in  the  preceding  scheme  of 
predestination.  The  confessions  of  Bohemia,  England,  and  Wirt- 
emburg,  and  the  first  Helvetian  Confession,  and  that  of  the  four 
cities  of  Strasburgh,  Constance,  Memmingen,  and  Lindau,  make 
no  mention  of  this  predestination :  those  of  Basle  and  Saxony  only- 
take  a  very  cursory  notice  of  it  in  three  words.  The  Augustan 
Confession  speaks  of  it  in  such  a  manner  as  to  induce  the  Genevan 
editors  to  think  that  some  annotation  was  necessary  on  their  part 
to  give  us  a  previous  warning.  The  last  of  the  Helvetian  Confes- 
sions, to  which  a  great  portion  of  the  Reformed  Churches  have 
expressed  their  assent,  likewise  speaks  of  it  in  such  a  strain  as 
makes  me  very  desirous  to  see  what  method  can  possibly  be  adopted 
to  give  it  any  accordance  with  that  doctrine  of  the  predestination 
which  I  have  stated.  Without  the  least  contention  or  cavilling,  it 
may  be  very  properly  made  a  subject  of  doubt,  whether  this  doctrine 
agrees  with  the  Belgic  Confession  and  the  Heidelberg  Catechism."  (8) 
I  have  given  these  extracts  to  show  that  nothing  in  the  preceding 
discussion  has  been  assumed  as  Calvinism,  but  what  is  to  be  found 

(7)  The  Augsburg  Confession  says,  "  Non  est  hie  opus  disputation ibus  de  pro?- 
destinatione  et  similibus.  Nam  promissio  est  universalis  et  nihil  detrahit  operibus, 
sed  exsuscitat  ad  fidem  et  ver  ebona  opera."  Act  20.  And  the  Saxon  Confession 
is  equally  indifferent  to  the  subject.  "  Non  addimus  hie  quaestiones  de  praidesti- 
natione  seu  de  electione ;  scddeducimusomneslectorcs  ad  verbum  Dei,  et  jubemus 
lit  voluntatem  Dei  verbo  ipsius  discant  sicut  iEtcraus  Pater  express^  voce  proecipit , 
hunc  audite."  Art.  de  Remiss.  Pecc. 

(8)  Njchoi.'s  Worjis  of  Arrninius,  vol.  1,  p.  5">~ 


HO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES-  j_PAKT 

hi  the  writings  of  the  founder  of  the  system,  and  in  the  confessions 
and  creeds  of  churches  which  professedly  admitted  his  doctrine. 

With  respect  to  modifications  of  this  system,  the  sublapsarian 
theory  has  been  already  considered  and  shown  to  be  substantially 
the  same  as  the  system  which  it  professes  to  mitigate  and  improve. 
We  may  now  adduce  another  modified  theory ;  but  shall,  upon 
examination,  find  it  but  little,  if  at  all,  removed  out  of  the  reach  of 
those  objections  which  have  been  stated  to  the  various  shades  of  the 
predestinating  scheme  already  noticed. 

That  scheme  is  in  England  usually  called  Baxterianism,  from  the 
celebrated  Baxter,  who  advocated  it  in  his  Treatise  of  Universal 
Redemption,  and  in  his  JWethodus  Theologies.  He  Avas,  however,  in 
this  theory  but  the  disciple  of  certain  divines  of  the  French  Pro- 
testant church,  whose  opinions  created  many  dissensions  abroad, 
and  produced  so  much  warmth  of  opposition  from  the  Calvinistic 
party,  that  they  were  obliged  first  to  engage  in  the  hopeless  attempt 
of  softening  down  the  harsher  aspects  of  the  doctrine  of  Calvin  and 
the  Synod  of  Dorr,  in  order  to  keep  themselves  in  countenance : 
then  to  attack  the  Arminians  with  asperity,  in  order  to  purge  them- 
selves of  the  suspicion  of  entire  heterodoxy  in  a  Calvinistic  church  ; 
and,  finally,  to  Avithdraw  from  the  contest.  The  Calvinism  of  the 
church  of  France  was,  however,  much  mitigated  in  subsequent 
times  by  the  influence  of  the  writings  of  these  theologians  ;  a  result 
which  also  has  followed  in  England  from  the  labours  of  Baxter, 
who,  though  he  formed  no  separate  school,  has  had  numerous  fol- 
lowers in  the  Calvinistic  churches  of  this  country.  The  real  author 
of  the  scheme,  at  least  in  a  systematized  form,  was  Camero,  who 
taught  divinity  at  Saumur,  and  it  was  unfolded  and  defended  by  his 
disciple  Amyraldus,  to  whom  Curcellaeus  replied  in  the  work  from 
which  I  have  above  made  some  quotations.  Baxter  says,  in  his 
preface  to  his  Saint's  Rest,  "The  middle  way  which  Camero, 
Crocius,  Martinius,  Amyraldus,  Davenant,  with  all  the  divines  of 
Britain  and  Bremen,  in  the  Synod  of  Dort  go,  I  think  is  nearest  the 
truth  of  any  that  I  know  who  have  written  on  these  points." (9) 
This  system  he  laboured  powerfully  to  defend,  and  his  works  on 
this  subject,  although  his  system  is  often  spoken  of,  being  but  little 
known  to  the  general  reader,  the  following  exhibition  of  this  scheme, 
from  his  work  entitled  "  Universal  Redemption,"  may  be  acceptable. 
It  makes  great  concessions  to  that  view,  of  the  scriptural  doctrine 

(9)  Of  Camero,  or  Cameron,  Amyraldus,  Courcelles,  and  the  controversy  in 
which  they  were  engaged,  see  an  interesting  account  in  Nichol's  Arminianism 
and  Calvinism  Compared,  vol.  1,  appendix  c,  a  work  of  elaborate  research,  and 
abounding  with  the  most  curious  information  as  to  the  opinions  and  history  of 
those  times. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  141 

which  we  have  attempted  to  establish ;  but,  for  want  of  going  another 
step,  it  is,  perhaps,  the  most  inconsistent  theory  to  which  the  varied 
attempts  to  modify  Calvinism  have  given  rise.  Baxter  first  differs 
from  the  majority  of  Calvinists,  though  not  from  all,  in  his  statement 
of  the  doctrine  of  satisfaction. 

"  Christ's  sufferings  were  not  a  fulfilling  of  the  law's  threatening 
(though  he  bore  its  curse  materially ;)  but  a  satisfaction  for  our  not 
fulfilling  the  precept,  and  to  prevent  God's  fulfilling  the  threatening 
on  us." 

"  Christ  paid  not,  therefore,  the  idem,  but  the  tantundem,  or 
aquivalens ;  not  the  very  debt  which  we  owed  and  the  law  required, 
but  the  value ;  (else  it  were  not  strictly  satisfaction,  which  is  redditio 
aquivalentis  :)  And  (it  being  improperly  called  the  paying  of  a  debt, 
but  properly  a  suffering  for  the  guilty)  the  idem  is  nothing  but  sup- 
plicium  delinquentis.  In  criminals,  dum  alius  solvet  simul  aliud  solvitur. 
The  law  knoweth  no  vicarius  po&nm ;  though  the  law  maker  may 
admit  it,  as  he  is  above  law ;  else  there  were  no  place  for  pardon,  if 
the  proper  debt  be  paid  and  the  law  not  relaxed,  but  fulfilled." 

"  Christ  did  neither  obey  nor  suffer  in  any  man's  stead,  by  a  strict, 
proper  representation  of  his  person  in  point  of  law  ;  so  as  that  the  law 
should  take  it,  as  done  or  suffered  by  the  party  himself  But  only 
as  a  third  person,  as  a  mediator,  he  voluntarily  bore  what  else  the 
.sinner  should  have  borne." 

"  To  assert  the  contrary  (especially  as  to  particular  persons 
considered  in  actual  sin)  is  to  overthrow  all  Scripture  theology, 
and  to  introduce  all  Antinomianism  ;  to  overthrow  all  possibility  of 
pardon,  and  assert  justification  before  we  sinned  or  were  born,  and 
to  make  ourselves  to  have  satisfied  God. 

"  Therefore  we  must  not  say  that  Christ  died  noslro  loco,  so  as 
to  personate  us,  or  represent  our  persons  in  law  sense;  but  only  to 
bear  what  else  we  must  have  borne."(l) 

This  system  explicitly  asserts,  that  Christ  made  a  satisfaction  by 
his  death  equally  for  the  sins  of  every  man  ;  and  thus  Baxter  essen- 
tially differs  both  from  the  rigid  Calvinists,  and,  also,  from  the 
sublapsarians,  who,  though  they  may  allow  that  the  reprobate  derive 
some  benefits  from  Christ's  death,  so  that  there  is  a  vague  sense  in 
which  he  may  be  said  to  have  died  for  all  men,  yet  they,  of  course, 
deny  to  such  the  benefit  of  Christ's  satisfaction  or  atonement  which 
Baxter  contends  for. 

"Neither  the  law,  whose  curse  Christ  bore,  nor  God,  as  the 
legislator  to  be  satisfied,  did  distinguish  between  men  as  elect  and 
reprobate,  or  as  believers  and  unbelievers,  de  present!  vel  defuturo : 
(1)  Universal  Redemption,  p.  48-51. 


H^  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  to  impose  upon  Christ,  or  require  from  him  satisfaction  for  the 
sins  of  one  sort  more  than  of  another,  but  for  mankind  in  general. 

"  God  the  Father,  and  Christ  the  Mediator,  now  dealeth  with  no 
man  upon  the  mere  rigorous  terms  of  the  first  law  ;  (obey  perfectly 
and  live,  else  thou  shalt  die ;)  but  giveth  to  all  much  mercy,  which, 
according  to  the  tenor  of  that  violated  law,  they  could  not  receive, 
and  calleth  them  to  repentance,  in  order  to  their  receiving  farther 
mercy  offered  them.  And  accordingly  he  will  not  judge  any  at 
last  according  to  the  mere  law  of  works,  but  as  they  have  obeyed 
or  not  obeyed  his  conditions  or  terms  of  grace. 

"  It  was  not  the  sins  of  the  elect  only,  but  of  all  mankind  fallen, 
which  lay  upon  Christ  satisfying.  And  to  assert  the  contrary,  inju- 
riously diminisheth  the  honour  of  his  sufferings ;  and  hath  other 
desperate  ill  consequences.  "(2) 

The  benefits  derived  to  all  men  equally,  from  the  satisfaction  of 
Christ,  he  thus  states, 

"  All  mankind  immediately  upon  Christ's  satisfaction,  are  redeem- 
ed and  delivered  from  that  legal  necessity  of  perishing  which  they 
were  under,  (not  by  remitting  sin  or  punishment  directly  to  them, 
but  by  giving  up  God's  jus  puniendi  into  the  hands  of  the  Redeemer ; 
nor  by  giving  any  right  directly  to  them,  but  per  meram  resultantiam 
this  happy  change  is  made  for  them  in  their  relation,  upon  the  said 
remitting  of  God's  right  and  advantage  of  justice  against  them,)  and 
they  are  given  up  to  the  Redeemer  as  their  owner  and  ruler,  to  be 
dealt  with  upon  terms  of  mercy  which  have  a  tendency  to  their 
recovery. 

"  God  the  Father  and  Christ  the  Mediator  hath  freely,  without 
any  prerequisite  condition  on  man's  part,  enacted  a  law  of  grace 
of  universal  extent,  in  regard  of  its  tenor,  by  which  he  giveth,  as  a 
deed  of  gift,  Christ  himself,  with  all  his  following  benefits  which  he 
bestoweth ;  (as  benefactor  and  legislator;)  and  this  to  all  alike, 
without  excluding  any ;  upon  condition  they  believe,  and  accept 
the  offer. 

"  By  this  law,  testament,  or  covenant,  all  men  are  conditionally 
pardoned,  justified,  and  reconciled  to  God  already,  and  no  man 
absolutely ;  nor  doth  it  make  a  difference,  nor  take  notice  of  any 
till  men's  performance  or  non-performance  of  the  condition  makes 
a  difference. 

"  In  the  new  law  Christ  hath  truly  given  himself  'with  a  conditional 
pardon,  justification,  and  conditional  right  to  salvation,  to  all  men  in 
the  world,  without  exception." (3) 
On  the  case  of  the  heathen : 

(2)  Ibid.  p.  36,  37.  and  50.  (3)  Ibid.  p.  36,  4y 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  143 

"  Though  God  hath  been  pleased  less  clearly  to  acquaint  us  on 
what  terms  he  dealeth  with  those  that  hear  not  of  Christ,  yet  it 
being  most  clear  and  certain,  that  he  dealeth  with  them  on  terms  of 
grace,  and  not  on  the  terms  of  the  rigorous  law  of  works,  this  general 
may  evince  them  to  be  the  mediator's  subjects,  and  redeemed. 

"  Though  it  be  very  difficult,  and  not  very  necessary,  to  know 
what  is  the  condition  prescribed  to  them  that  hear  not  of  Christ,  or 
on  what  terms  Christ  will  judge  them  ;  yet,  to  me  it  seems  to  be 
the  covenant  made  with  Mam,  Gen.  iii,  15,  which  they  are  under, 
requiring  their  taking  God  to  be  their  only  God  and  Redeemer,  and 
to  expecting  mercy  from  him  and  loving  him  above  all,  as  their  end 
and  chief  good;  and  repenting  of  sin,  and  sincere  obedience, 
according  to  the  laws  promulgated  to  them,  to  lead  them  farther. 

"  All  those  that  have  not  heard  of  Christ,  have  yet  much  mercy 
which  they  receive  from  him,  and  is  the  fruit  of  his  death  :  accord- 
ing to  the  well  or  ill  using  whereof  it  seems  possible  that  God  will 
judge  them. 

"  It  is  a  course  to  blind,  and  not  to  inform  men,  to  lay  the  main 
stress  in  the  doctrine  of  redemption  upon  our  uncertain  conclusions 
of  God's  dealing  with  such  as  never  heard  of  Christ,  seeing  all  proof 
is  per  notiora ;  and  we  must  reduce  points  uncertain  to  the  certain, 
and  not  the  certain  to  the  uncertain,  in  our  trial." (4) 

In  arguments  drawn  from  the  consequences  which  follow  the 
denial  of  "  universal  satisfaction,"  Baxter  is  particularly  terse  and 
conclusive. 

"  The  doctrine  which  denieth  universal  satisfaction  hath  all  these 
inconveniences  and  absurd  consequents  following :  therefore  it  is 
not  of  God,  nor  true. 

"  It  either  denieth  the  universal  promise  or  conditional  gift  of 
pardon  and  life  to  all  men  if  they  will  believe,  and  then  it  overturneth 
the  substance  of  Christ's  law  and  Gospel  promise  ;  or  else  it  maketh 
God  to  give  conditionally  to  all  men  a  pardon  and  salvation  which 
Christ  never  purchased,  and  without  his  dying  for  men. 

"  It  maketh  God  either  not  to  offer  the  effects  of  Christ's  satis- 
faction (pardon  and  life)  to  all,  but  only  to  the  elect ;  or  else  to 
offer  that  which  is  not,  and  which  he  cannot  give. 

"  It  denieth  the  direct  object  of  faith,  and  of  God's  offer,  that  is 
Christum  qui  satisfecit,  (a  Christ  that  hath  satisfied.) 

"It  either  denieth  the  non-elect's  deliverance  from  that  flat 

necessity  of  perishing,  which  came  on  man  for  sinning  against  the 

first  law,  by  its  remediless,  unsuspended  obligation  ;  (and  so  neither 

Christ,  Gospel,  or  mercy,  had  ever  any  nature  of  a  remedy  to  them, 

(4)  Ibid.  p.  37,  38,  and  54. 


144  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

nor  any  more  done  towards  their  deliverance  than  towards  the 
deliverance  of  the  devils ;)  or  else  it  maketh  this  deliverance  and 
remedy  to  be  without  satisfaction  by  Christ  for  them. 

"  It  either  denieth  that  God  commandeth  all  to  believe,  (but  only 
the  elect ;)  or  else  maketh  God  to  assign  them  a  deceiving  object 
for  their  faith,  commanding  them  to  believe  in  that  which  never  was, 
and  to  trust  in  that  which  would  deceive  them  if  they  did  trust  it. 

"  It  maketh  God  either  to  have  appointed  and  commanded  the 
non-elect  to  use  no  means  at  all  for  their  recovery  and  salvation,  or 
else  to  have  appointed  them  means  which  are  all  utterly  useless  and 
insufficient,  for  want  of  a  prerequisite  cause  without  them ;  yea, 
which  imply  a  contradiction. 

"  It  maketh  the  true  and  righteous  God  to  make  promises  of 
pardon  and  salvation  to  all  men  on  condition  of  believing,  which 
he  neither  would  nor  could  perform,  (for  want  of  such  satisfaction 
to  his  justice,)  if  they  did  believe. 

"  It  denieth  the  true  sufficiency  of  Christ's  death  for  the  pardon- 
ing and  saving  of  all  men,  if  they  did  believe. 

"  It  makes  the  cause  of  men's  damnation  to  be  principally  for 
want  of  an  expiatory  sacrifice  and  of  a  Saviour,  and  not  of  believing. 

"  It  leaveth  all  the  world,  elect  as  well  as  others,  without  any 
ground  and  object  for  the  first  justifying  faith,  and  in  an  utter  un- 
certainty whether  they  may  believe  to  justification  or  not. 

"  It  denieth  the  most  necessary  humbling  aggravation  of  men's 
sins,  so  that  neither  the  minister  can  tell  wicked  men  that  they  have 
sinned  against  him  that  bought  them,  nor  can  any  wicked  man  so 
accuse  himself ;  no,  nor  any  man  that  doth  not  know  himself  to  be 
elect :  they  cannot  say,  my  sins  put  Christ  to  death,  and  were  the 
cause  of  his  sufferings  :  nay,  a  minister  cannot  tell  any  man  in  the 
world,  certainly,  (their  sins  put  Christ  to  death,)  because  he  is  not 
certain  who  is  elect  or  sincere  in  the  faith. 

"  It  subverteth  Christ's  new  dominion  and  government  of  the 
world,  and  his  general  legislation  and  judgment  according  to  his 
law,  which  is  now  founded  in  his  title  of  redemption,  as  the  first 
dominion  and  government  was  on  the  title  of  creation. 

"  It  maketh  all  the  benefits  that  the  non-elect  receive,  whether 
spiritual  or  corporal ;  and  so  even  the  relaxation  of  the  curse  of 
the  law,  (without  which  relaxation  no  man  could  have  such  mer- 
cies,) to  befall  men  without  the  satisfaction  of  Christ;  and  so  either 
make  satisfaction,  as  to  all  those  mercies,  needless,  or  else  must 
find  another  satisfier. 

"  It  maketh  the  law  of  grace  to  contain  far  harder  terms  than 
the  law  of  works  did  in  its  utmost  rigour 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  14<5 

"  It  maketh  the  law  of  Moses  either  to  bind  all  the  non-elect  still 
to  all  ceremonies  and  bondage  ordinances,  (and  so  sets  up  Judaism,) 
or  else  to  be  abrogated  and  taken  down,  and  men  delivered  from 
it,  without  Christ's  suffering  for  them. 

"  It  destroys  almost  the  whole  work  of  the  ministry,  disabling 
ministers  either  to  humble  men  by  the  chiefest  aggravations  of  their 
sins,  and  to  convince  them  of  ingratitude  and  unkind  dealing  with 
Christ,  or  to  show  them  any  hopes  to  draw  them  to  repentance,  or 
any  love  and  mercy  tending  to  salvation  to  melt  and  win  them  to  the 
love  of  Christ ;  or  any  sufficient  object  for  their  faith  and  affiance, 
or  any  means  to  be  used  for  pardon  or  salvation,  or  any  promise 
to  encourage  them  to  come  in,  or  any  threatening  to  deter  them. 

"  It  makes  God  and  the  Redeemer  to  have  done  no  more  for  the 
remedying  of  the  misery  of  most  of  fallen  mankind  than  for  tlie 
devils,  nor  to  have  put  them  into  any  more  possibility  of  pardon  or 
salvation. 

"  Nay,  it  makes  God  to  have  dealt  far  hardlier  with  most  men 
than  with  the  devils ;  making  them  a  law  which  requireth  their 
believing  in  one  that  never  died  for  them,  and  taking  him  for  their 
Redeemer  that  never  redeemed  them,  and  that  on  the  mere  fore- 
sight that  they  would  not  believe  it,  or  decree  that  they  should  not ; 
and  so  to  create  by  that  law  a  necessity  of  their  far  sorer  punish- 
ment, without  procuring  them  any  possibility  of  avoiding  it. 

"  It  makes  the  Gospel  of  its  own  nature  to  be  the  greatest  plague 
and  judgment  to  most  of  men  that  receive  it,  that  ever  God  sendeth 
to  men  on  earth,  by  binding  them  over  to  a  greater  punishment,  and 
aggravating  their  sin,  without  giving  them  any  possibility  of  remedy. 

"  It  maketh  the  case  of  all  the  world,  except  the  elect,  as  de- 
plorate,  remediless,  and  hopeles,  as  the  case  of  the  damned,  and  so 
denieth  them  to  have  any  day  of  grace,  visitation,  or  salvation,  or 
any  price  for  happiness  put  into  their  hands. 

"  It  maketh  Christ  to  condemn  men  to  hell  fire  for  not  receiving 
him  for  their  Redeemer  that  never  redeemed  them,  and  for  not 
resting  on  him  for  salvation  by  his  blood,  which  was  never  shed  for 
them,  and  for  not  repenting  unto  life,  when  they  had  no  hope  of 
mercy,  and  faith  and  repentance  could  not  have  saved  them. 

"  It  putteth  sufficient  excuses  into  the  mouths  of  the  condemned. 

"  It  maketh  the  torments  of  conscience  iii  hell  to  be  none  at  all, 
and  teacheth  the  damned  to  put  away  all  their  sorrows  and  self 
accusations. 

"  It  denieth  all  the  privative  part  of  those  torments  which  men 
are  obliged  to  sutler  by  the  obligation  of  Christ's  law,  and  so  maketh 
hell  either  no  hell  at  all,  or  next  to  none. 

Vol,  III-  19 


146  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTED  [PART 

"  And  I  shall  anon  show  how  it  leads  to  infidelity  and  other  sins, 
and,  after  this,  what  face  of  religion  is  left  unsubverted  1  Not  that 
I  charge  those  that  deny  universal  satisfaction  with  holding  all  these 
abominations  ;  but  their  doctrine  of  introducing  them  by  necessary 
consequence  :  it  is  the  opinion  and  not  the  men  that  I  accuse." 

A  thorough  Arminian  could  say  nothing  stronger  than  what  is 
asserted  in  several  ,of  the  above  quotations ;  and,  perhaps,  what 
might  not  be  borne  from  him,  may  call  attention  from  Baxter,  and 
happy  would  it  be  if  every  advocate  of  Calvin's  reprobation  would 
give  these  "  consequents,"  a  candid  consideration. 

The  peculiarity  of  Baxter's  scheme  will  be  seen  from  the  follow- 
ing farther  extracts ;  and,  after  all,  it  singularly  leaves  itself  open 
to  almost  all  the  objections  which  he  so  powerfully  urges  against 
Calvinism  itself. 

"  Though  Christ  died  equally  for  all  men,  in  the  aforesaid  law 
sense,  as  he  satisfied  the  offended  legislator,  and  as  giving  himself  to 
all  alike  in  the  conditional  covenant;  yet  he  never  properly  in- 
tended   OR    PURPOSED    THE   ACTUAL  JUSTIFYING  AND   SAVING   OF 

all,  nor  of  any  but  those  that  come  to  be  justified  and  saved :  he 
did  not,  therefore,  die  for  all,  nor  for  any  that  perish,  with  a  decree 
or  resolution  to  save  them,  much  less  did  he  die  for  all  alike, 

AS  TO  THIS  INTENT. 

"  Christ  hath  given  faith  to  none  by  his  law  or  testament,  though 
he  hath  revealed,  that  to  some  he  will,  as  benefactor  and  Dominus 
Absolutus,  give  that  grace  which  shall  infallibly  produce  it ;  and 
God  hath  given  some  to  Christ  that  he  might  prevail  with  them 
accordingly ;  yet  this  is  no  giving  it  to  the  person,  nor  hath  he  in 
himself  ever  the  more  title  to  it,  nor  can  any  lay  claim  to  it  as 
their  due. 

"It  belongeth  not  to  Christ  as  satisfier,  nor  yet  as  legislator,  to 
make  wicked  refusers  to  become  willing,  and  receive  him  and  the 
benefits  which  he  otters ;  therefore  he  may  do  all  for  them  that  is 
lore  expressed,  though  he  cure  not  their  unbelief. 

"  Faith  is  a  fruit  of  the  death  of  Christ,  (and  so  is  all  the  good 
which  we  do  enjoy,)  but  not  directly,  as  it  is  satisfaction  to  justice  ; 
but  only  remotely,  as  it  proceedeth  from  that  jus  dominii  which 
Christ  has  received  to  send  the  Spirit  in  what  measure  and  to 
whom  he  will,  and  to  succeed  it  accordingly ;  and  as  it  is  neces- 
sary to  the  attainment  of  the  farther  ends  of  his  death  in  the  certain 
gathering  and  saving  of  the  elect."(5) 

Thus,  then,  the  whole  theory  comes  to  this,  that,  although  a  con- 
ditional salvation  has  been  purchased  by  Christ  for  all  men,  and  is 
(5)  Ibid.  p.  63,  Ac 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  11*/ 

offered  to  them,  and  all  legal  difficulties  are  removed  out  of  the  way 
of  their  pardon  as  sinners  by  the  atonement,  yet  Christ  hath  not 
purchased  for  any  man  the  gift  of  faith,  or  the  power  of  performing 
the  condition  of  salvation  required ;  but  gives  this  to  some,  and  does 
not  give  it  to  others,  by  virtue  of  that  absolute  dominion  over  men 
which  he  has  purchased  for  himself ;  so  that,  in  fact,  the  old  scheme 
of  election  and  reprobation  still  comes  in,  only  with  this  difference, 
that  the  Calvinists  refer  that  decree  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  Father, 
Baxter  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  Son;  one  makes  the  decree  of 
reprobation  to  issue  from  the  Creator  and  Judge ;  the  other, 
(which  is  indeed  the  more  repulsive  view,)  from  the  Redeemer 
himself,  who  has  purchased  even  those  to  whom  he  denies  the  gift 
of  faitji  with  his  own  most  precious  blood.  This  is  plain  from  the 
following  quotation : 

"  God  did  not  give  Christ  faith  for  his  blood  shed  in  exchange  ; 
the  thing  that  God  was  to  give  the  Son  for  his  satisfaction,  was 
dominion  and  rule  of  the  redeemed  creature,  and  power  therein  to 
use  what  means  he  saw  fit  for  the  bringing  in  of  souls  to  himself, 
even  to  send  forth  so  much  of  his  word  and  Spirit  as  he  pleased;  both 
the  Father  and  Son  resolving,  from  eternity,  to  prevail  infallibly 
with  all  the  elect ;  but  never  did  Christ  desire  at  his  Father's  hands 
that  all  whom  he  satisfied  for,  should  be  infallibly  and  irresistibly 
brought  to  believe,  nor  did  God  ever  grant  or  promise  any  such 
thing.  Jesus  Christ,  as  a  ransom,  died  for  all,  and  as  Rector  per 
leges,  or  legislator,  he  hath  conveyed  the  fruits  of  his  death  to  all, 
that  is,  those  fruits  which  it  appertained  to  him  as  legislator  to  con- 
vey, which  is  right  to  what  his  new  law  or  covenant  doth  promise  ; 
but  those  mercies  which  he  gives  as  Dominus  absolutus,  arbitrarily 
besides  or  above  his  engagement,  he  neither  gives  nor  ever  intended 
to  give  to  all  that  he  died  for." (6) 

The  only  quibble  which  prevents  the  real  aspect  of  this  scheme 
from  being  at  first  seen,  is,  that  Baxter,  and  the  divines  of  this 
school,  give  to  the  elect  irresistible  effectual  grace  ;  but  contend, 
that  others  have  sufficient  grace.  This  kind  of  grace  is  called,  aptly 
enough,  by  Baxter  himself,  "  sufficient  ineffectual  grace  ;"  and  that 
it  is  worthy  the  appellation,  his  own  account  of  it  will  show. 

"  I  say  it  again,  confidently,  all  men  that  perish  (who  have  the 
use  of  reason)  do  perish  directly,  for  rejecting  sufficient  recovering 
grace.  By  grace,  I  mean  mercy  contrary  to  merit :  by  recover- 
ing, I  mean  such  as  tendeth  in  its  own  nature  towards  their  reco- 
very, and  leadeth  or  helpeth  them  thereto.  By  sufficient,  I  meau, 
■vot  sufficient  directly  to  save  them  ;  (for  such  none  of  the 

(f»>  Ibid.  p.  425. 


[48  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTE^.  [PART 

elect  have  till  they  are  saved ;)  nor  yet  sufficient  to  give  them 

FAITH  OR  CAUSE  THEM  SAVINGLY  TO  BELIEVE.       Bllt  it  is  Sufficient 

to  bring  them  nearer  Christ  than  they  are,  though  not  to  put  them 
into  immediate  possession  of  Christ  by  union  with  him,  as  faith 
would  do.  It  is  an  easy  truth,  that  all  men  naturally  are  far  from 
Christ,  and  that  some,  by  custom  in  sinning,  for  want  of  inform- 
ing and  restraining  means,  are  much  farther  from  him  than  others, 
(as  the  heathens  are,)  and  that  it  is  not  God's  usual  way  (nor  to  be 
expected)  to  bring  these  men  to  Christ  at  once,  by  one  act,  or 
without  any  preparation,  or  first  bringing  them  nearer  to  him.  It 
is  a  similitude  used  by  some  that  oppose  what  I  now  say :  suppose 
a  man  in  a  lower  room  should  go  no  more  steps  than  he  in  the  mid- 
dle room,  he  must  go  many  steps  before  he  came  to  be  as  near  you 
as  the  other  is.  Now,  suppose  you  offer  to  take  them  by  the  hand 
when  they  come  to  the  upper  stairs,  and  give  them  some  other  suf- 
ficient help  to  come  up  the  lower  steps :  if  these  men  will  not  use 
the  help  given  them  to  ascend  the  first  steps,  (though  entreated,) 
who  can  be  blamed  but  themselves  if  they  came  not  to  the  top  1  It 
is  not  your  fault  but  theirs,  that  they  have  not  your  hand  to  lift 
them  up  at  the  last  step.  So  is  our  present  case.  Worldlings,  and 
sensual  ignorant  sinners,  have  many  steps  to  ascend  before  they 
come  to  justifying  faith :  and  heathens  have  many  steps  before  they 
come  as  far  as  ungodly  Christians,  (as  might  easily  be  manifested 
by  enumeration  of  several  necessary  particulars.)  Now,  if  these  will 
not  use  that  sufficient  help  that  Christ  gives  them  to  come  the  first, 
or  second,  or  third  step,  who  is  it  long  of  that  they  have  not 
faith  ?"(7) 

But  Ave  have  no  reason  to  conclude,  from  this  system,  that  if  they 
took  the  steps  required,  it  would  bring  them  "  nearer  to  Christ  than 
they  are,"  or,  at  least,  bring  them  up  to  saving  faith,  which  is 
the  great  point,  since  Mr.  Baxter's  own  doctrine  is,  that  Christ 
"  never  properly  intended  or  purposed  the  actual  justifying,  and 
saving  of  all,  and  did  not,  therefore,  die  for  all,  nor  for  any  that 
perish,  with  a  design  or  resolution  to  save  them,  much  less  did  he  die 
for  all,  as  to  this  intent."  Those,  then,  for  whom  Christ  died,  not 
with  intent  to  give  saving  faith,  cannot  be  saved ;  yet  we  are  told, 
that  to  these  sufficient  grace  is  given,  to  take  a  step  or  two  which 
would  bring  them  "  nearer  to  Christ."  Suppose  such  persons,  then, 
to  take  these  steps,  yet,  as  Christ  died  not  for  them,  with  intent  to 
give  them  saving  faith,  without  this  intent,  they  cannot  have  saving 
faith,  since  it  is  not  a  part  of  Christ's  purchase,  but  his  arbitrary 
gift.     The  truth  then  is,  that  their  salvation  is  as  impossible  as  that 

(?)  Ibid.  p.  434. 


SECOND.]  I11EOLOGICAL  INSTiTXJTEij.  141* 

of  the  reprobates  under  the  supralapsarian  scheme,  and  the  rea- 
son of  their  doom  is  no  act  of  their  own,  but  an  act  of  Christ  him- 
self, who,  as  "  absolute  Lord,"  denies  that  to  them  which  is  necessary 
to  their  salvation. 

It  is,  however,  but  fair  that  Mr.  Baxter  should  himself  answer 
this  objection. 

"  Objection. — Then,  they  that  come  not  the  first  step  are  excusa- 
ble ;  for,  if  they  had  come  to  the  step  next  believing,  they  had  no 
assurance  that  Christ  would  have  given  them  faith. 

"  Answer. — No  such  matter :  For  though  they  had  no  assurance, 
they  had  both  God's  command  to  seek  more  grace,  and  sufficient 
encouragement  thereto ;  they  had  such  as  Mr.  Cotton  calls  half 
promises,  that  is,  a  discovery  of  a  possibility,  and  high  degree  of 
probability  of  obtaining ;  as  Peter  to  Simon,  pray,  if  perhaps  the 
thoughts  of  thy  heart  may  be  forgiven.  They  may  think  God  will 
not  appoint  men  vain  means,  and  he  hath  appointed  some  means 
to  all  men  to  get  more  grace*  and  bring  them  nearer  Christ  than 
they  are.  Yea,  no  man  can  name  that  man  since  the  world  was 
made,  that  did  his  best  in  the  use  of  these  means,  and  lost  his  labour. 
So  that  if  all  men  have  not  faith,  it  is  their  own  fault ;  not  onty  as 
originally  sinners,  but  as  rejecting  sufficient  grace  to  have  brought 
them  nearer  Christ  than  they  were  ;  for  which  it  is  that  they  justly 
perish,  as  is  more  fully  opened  in  the  dispute  of  sufficient  grace." 

One  argument  from  Scripture  demolishes  this  whole  scheme. 
Mr.  Baxter  makes  the  condemnation  of  men  to  rest  upon  their  not 
coming  "  nearer  to  Christ"  than  they  are  in  their  natural  state  ;  but 
the  Scripture  places  their  guilt  in  not  fully  "  coming  to  him  ;"  or, 
in  other  words,  in  their  not  believing  in  Christ  "  to  salvation,"  since 
it  has  made  faith  their  duty,  and  has  connected  salvation  with  faith. 
That  they  must  take  previous  steps,  such  as  consideration  and  re- 
pentance, is  true,  and  that  they  are  guilty  for  not  taking  them  ;  but 
then  their  guilt  arises  from  their  rejection  of  a  strength  and  grace 
to  consider  and  repent  which  is  imparted  to  them,  in  order  to  lead 
them,  through  this  process,  to  saving  faith  itself;  and  they  are  con- 
demned for  not  having  this  faith,  because  not  only  the  preparatory 
steps,  but  the  faith  itself  is  put  within  their  reach,  or  they  could  not 
be  condemned  for  unbelief.  If  Baxter  really  meant  that  any  steps 
these  non-elect  persons  could  take,  would  actually  put  them  into 
possession  of  saving  faith,  he  would  have  said  so  in  so  many  plain 
words,  and  then,  between  him  and  the  Arminians  there  would  have 
been  no  difference,  so  far  as  they  who  perish  are  concerned.  But 
coming  nearer  to  Christ,  and  nearer  to  saving  faith  are  with  him 
quite  distinct.     His  concern  was  not,  to  show  how  the  non-elect 


loO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

might  be  saved ;  but  how  they  might  with  some  plausibility  be 
damned. 

"  What  then,"  says  Dr.  Womack,  "  is  the  universal  redemption 
you  or  they  speak  of?  Doth  it  consist  in  the  ablation  of  the  curse 
or  pain,  the  impetration  of  grace  and  righteousness,  and  the  collation 
of  life  and  glory  1  Man's  misery  consists  but  of  two  parts,  sin  and 
punishment.  Doth  your  universal  redemption  make  sufficient  pro- 
vision to  free  the  non-elect  from  both,  or  from  either  of  these  1  From 
the  wrath  to  come,  the  damnation  of  hell,  or  from  iniquity  and  their 
rain  conversation?  Indeed,  in  your  assize  sermons,  you  did  very 
seasonably  preach  up  Christ  to  be  a  Lord  Chief  Justice  to  judge  the 
reprobate  ;  but  I  cannot  find  that  ever  you  declare  him  to  be  their 
Lord  Keeper,  or  their  Lord  Treasurer,  to  communicate  his  saving 
grace  for  their  conversion,  or  to  secure  them  against  the  assaults 
and  rage  of  their  ghostly  enemy.  These  last  offices  you  suppose 
him  to  bear  in  favour  of  the  elect  only,  so  that  your  universal  re- 
demption holds  a  very  fair  correspondence  with  your  sufficient  grace, 
(as  to  the  non-elect,) — there  is  not  one  single  person  sanctified  by 
this,  or  saved  by  that." (8) 

The  remark  of  Curcellaeus  on  the  same  system  as  delivered  by 
Amyraldus,  is  conclusive. 

"  Besides,  since  faith  is  necessary,  in  order  to  make  us  partakers 
of  the  benefits  which  are  procured  by  the  death  of  Christ,  and  since 
no  one  can  obtain  it  by  his  natural  powers,  (for  it  is  imparted 
through  a  special  gift,  from  which  God,  by  an  absolute  decree,  has 
excluded  the  greatest  portion  of  mankind,)  of  what  avail  is  it  that 
Christ  has  died  for  those  to  whom  faith  is  denied  ?  Does  not  the  affair 
revert  to  the  same  point,  as  if  he  had  never  entertained  an  intention  of 
redeeming  them?" (9) 

This  cannot  consistently  be  denied.  Mr.  Baxter,  indeed,  says, 
that  "  none  can  name  the  man  since  the  world  was  made,  that  did 
his  best  in  the  use  of  the  means  to  obtain  more  grace,  and  lost  his 
labour."  So  we  believe,  but  this  helps  not  Mr.  Baxter.  One  of 
his  main  principles  is,  that  there  is  a  class  of  men  to  whom  Christ 
has  resolved  to  give  saving  faith  ;  to  the  rest  he  has  resolved  not  to 
give  it.  The  man,  then,  who  seeks  more  than  common  grace,  and 
obtains  saving  grace,  is  either  in  the  class  to  whom  Christ  has 
resolved,  by  right  of  dominion,  to  give  saving  grace,  or  he  is  not. 
If  the  former,  then  he  is  one  of  the  elect,  and  so  the  instance  given 
proves  nothing  as  to  the  case  of  the  non-elect ;  but,  if  he  be  of  the 
latter  class,  then  one  of  those  to  whom  Christ  never  resolve^to  give 
saving  grace,  by  some  means  obtains  it, — how,  it  will  be  difficult  to 
(8)  Cqlvinistic  Cabinet  Unlocked.        (0)  De  Jure  Dei  Creatnras,  &d> 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  161 

say.  In  fact,  it  was  never  allowed  by  Mr.  Baxter  or  his  followers, 
that  any  but  the  elect  would  be  saved. 

The  remarks  of  a  Calvinist  upon  the  "middle  scheme"  of  the 
French  divines,  the  same  in  substance  as  that  which  was  afterwards 
advocated  by  Baxter,  may  properly  close  our  remarks. 

"  This  mitigated  view  of  the  doctrine  of  predestination  has  only 
one  defect ;  but  it  is  a  capital  one.  It  represents  God  as  dewing  a 
thing  (that  is  salvation  and  happiness)  for  all,  which,  in  order  to 
its  attainment,  requires  a  degree  of  his  assistance  and  succour, 
which  he  refuseth  to  many.  This  rendered  grace  and  redemption 
universal  only  in  words,  but  partial  in  reality;  and,  therefore, 
did  not  at  all  mend  the  matter  The  supralapsarians  were  con- 
sistent with  themselves  ;  but  their  doctrine  was  harsh  and  terrible, 
and  was  founded  on  the  most  unworthy  notions  of  the  Supreme 
Being ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  system  of  Amyraut  was  full  of 
inconsistencies :  nay,  even  the  sublapsarian  doctrine  has  its  diffi- 
culties, and  rather  palliates  than  removes  the  horrors  of  supralap- 
sarianism.  What,  then,  is  to  be  done  1  From  what  quarter  shall 
the  candid  and  well-disposed  Christian  receive  that  solid  satisfaction 
and  wise  direction  which  neither  of  these  systems  is  adapted  to 
administer  ]  These  he  will  receive  by  turning  his  dazzled  and  feeble 
eye  from  the  secret  decrees  of  God,  which  were  neither  designed 
to  be  rules  of  action,  nor  sources  of  comfort  to  mortals  here  below  ; 
and,  by  fixing  his  view  upon  the  mercy  of  God,  as  it  is  manifested 
through  Christ,  the  pure  laws  and  sublime  promises  of  his  Gospel, 
and  the  equity  of  his  present  government  and  future  tribunal."(l) 

The  theory  to  which  the  name  of  Baxter  has  given  some  weight 
in  this  country,  has  been  introduced  more  at  length,  because  with 
it  stands  or  falls  every  system  of  moderated  or  modified  Calvinism, 
which  by  more  modern  writers  has  been  advocated.  The  schemo 
of  Dr.  Williams,  of  Rotherham,  is  little  beside  the  old  theory  of 
supralapsarian  reprobation,  in  its  twofold  enunciation  of  preten- 
tion, by  which  God  refuses  help  to  a  creature  which  cannot  stand 
without  help,  and  his  consequent  damnation  for  the  crimes  com- 
mitted in  consequence  of  this  withholding  of  supernatural  aid.  The 
dress  is  altered,  and  the  system  has  a  dash  of  Cameronism,  but  it  is 
in  substance  the  same.  All  other  mitigated  schemes  rest  on  two 
principles,  the  sufficiency  of  the  atonement  for  all  mankind,  and 
the  sufficiency  of  grace  to  those  who  believe  not.  For  the  first,  it 
Is  enough  to  say,  that  the  Synod  of  Dort  and  the  higher  Calvinistic 
school  will  agree  with  them  upon  this  point,  and  so  nothing  is 
gained ;  for  the  second,  that  the  sufficiency  of  grace  in  these 
(1)  Maclaine's  Notes  on  Mosheim's  History. 


lo2  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

schemes  is  always  understood  in  Baxter's  sense,  and  is  mere  verb- 
iage. It  is  not  "  the  grace  of  God  which  bringeth  salvation  ;" 
for  no  man  is  actually  saved  without  something  more  than  this 
"  sufficient  grace"  provides.  That  which  is  contended  for,  is,  in 
fact,  not  a  sufficiency  of  grace  in  order  to  salvation ;  but,  in  order 
to  justify  the  condemnation  which  inevitably  follows.  For  this  alone 
the  struggle  is  made,  but  without  success.  The  main  characteristic 
of  all  these  theories,  from  the  first  to  the  last,  from  the  highest  to 
the  lowest  is,  that  a  part  of  mankind  are  shut  out  from  the  mercies 
of  God,  on  some  ground  irrespective  of  their  refusal  of  a  sincere 
offer  to  them  of  salvation  through  Christ,  made  with  a  communi- 
cated power  of  embracing  it.  Some  power  they  allow  to  the 
reprobate,  as  natural  power,  and  degrees  of  superadded  moral 
power ;  but  in  no  case  the  power  to  believe  unto  salvation ;  and 
thus,  as  one  well  observes,  "  when  they  have  cut  some  fair  trenches, 
as  if  they  would  bring  the  water  of  life  unto  the  dwellings  of  the 
reprobate,  on  a  sudden  they  open  a  sluice  which  carries  it  off  again." 
The  whole  labour  of  these  theories  is  to  find  out  some  decent 
pretext  for  the  infliction  of  punishment  on  them  that  perish,  inde- 
pendent of  the  only  reason  given  by  Scripture,  their  rejection  of  a 
mercy  free  for  all. 

Having  exhibited  the  Calvinistic  system  on  its  own  authorities, 
it  may  be  naturally  asked  from  what  mode  or  basis  of  thinking  a 
scheme  could  arise  so  much  at  variance  with  the  Scriptures,  and 
with  all  received  notions  of  just  and  benevolent  administration 
among  men  ;  properties  of  government,  which  must  be  found  more 
perfectly  in  the  government  of  God,  by  reason  of  the  perfection  of 
its  author,  than  in  any  other.  That  it  had  its  source  in  a  course  of 
induction  from  the  sacred  Scriptures,  though  erroneous,  is  not 
probable  ;  for,  if  it  had  been  left  to  that  test,  it  is  pretty  certain  it 
would  not  have  maintained  itself.  It  appears  rather  to  have  arisen 
from  metaphysical  hypotheses  and  school  subtilties,  to  wrhich  the 
sense  of  Scripture  has  been  accommodated,  often  very  violently ;  and 
by  subtilties  of  this  kind,  it  has,  at  all  times,  been  chiefly  supported. 

It  has,  for  instance,  been  assumed  by  the  advocates  of  this  theo- 
logical theory,  that  all  things  which  come  to  pass  have  been  fixed 
by  eternal  decrees  ;  and  that  as  many  men  actually  perish,  it 
must,  therefore,  have  been  decreed  that  they  should  perish :  and, 
consistently  with  such  a  scheme,  it  became  necessary  to  exclude 
a  part  of  the  human  race  from  all  share  in  the  benefits  of  Christ's 
redemption.  The  argument  employed  to  confirm  the  premises,  is, 
"  that  it  is  agreeable  to  reason  and  to  the  analogy  of  nature,  that 
God  should  conduct  all  things  according  to  a  deliberate  and  fixed 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  1 53 

plan,  independent  of  his  creatures,  rather  than  that  he  should  be 
influenced,  even  in  his  purposes,  by  the  foresight  of  their  capricious 
conduct."(2)  "  It  is  not  easy  to  reconcile  the  immutability  and 
efficacy  of  the  Divine  counsel  which  enters  into  our  conceptions  of 
the  first  cause,  with  a  purpose  to  save  all,  suspended  upon  a  con- 
dition which  is  not  fulfilled  with  regard  to  many."  (3)  This  has, 
indeed,  all  along  been  the  main  stress  of  the  argument  for  absolute 
decrees,  that  a  conditional  decree  reflects  dishonour  upon  the  Divine 
attributes,  "by  leaving  God,  as  it  were,  in  suspense,  and  waiting  to 
see  what  men  will  do,  before  he  passes  a  firm  and  irrevocable 
decree ;"  which,  as  they  say,  seems  to  imply  want  of  power  and 
prescience  in  God,  and  to  be  inconsistent  with  other  of  his  Divine 
perfections.  They  especially  think,  that  this  is  irreconcilable  with 
the  immutability  of  God,  and  that  to  subject  his  decrees  to  the 
changes  of  a  countless  number  of  mutable  beings,  must  render  him 
the  most  mutable  being  in  the  universe. 

The  whole  of  this  objection,  however,  seems  to  involve  a  petitio 
principii.  It  is  taken  for  granted,  either  that  the  decrees  of  God 
are  absolute  appointments  from  eternity,  and  then  any  change  of  his 
decrees,  dependent  upon  the  acts  of  creatures,  would  be  a  contra- 
diction ;  or  else,  that  the  acts  of  creatures  being  free,  it  folloAvs, 
that  God  had  from  eternity  no  plan,  and  conducts  his  own  govern- 
ment only  as  circumstances  may  arise.  But,  that  either  the  decrees 
of  God  are  fixed  and  absolute,  or,  that  God  can  have  no  plan  of 
government  if  that  be  denied,  is  the  very  alternative  to  be  proved, 
the  matter  which  is  in  debate.  It  becomes  necessary,  therefore, 
in  order  to  ascertain  the  truth,  to  fix  the  sense  of  the  favourite  term 
"decrees,"  and  for  this  we  have  no  sound  guide  but  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  which,  as  to  what  relates  to  man's  salvation  at  least, 
contain  the  only  exposition  of  the  purposes  of  God. 

The  term  "  decree"  is  no  where  in  Scripture  used  in  the  sense 
in  which  it  is  taken  in  the  theology  of  the  Calvinists.  It  is  properly 
a  legislative  or  judicial  term,  importing  the  solemn  decision  of  a 
court,  and  was  adopted  into  that  system,  probably,  because  of  tin.' 
absolute  meaning  it  conveys,  which  quality  of  absoluteness  is,  in 
fact,  the  point  debated.  The  "purpose"  and  "  counsel"  of  God  are 
the  scriptural  terms  applicable  to  this  subject ;  one  of  which, 
"counsel,"  expresses  an  act  of  wisdom,  and  the  other,  necessarily 
implies  it,  as  it  is  the  "purpose"  design,  or  determination  of  a 
Being  of  infinite  perfection,  who  can  purpose,  design,  will,  and 
determine,  nothing  but  under  the  .direction  of  his  intelligence,  and 
the  regulation  of  his  moral  attributes. 

(2)  Dr.  Rankin's  Institutes.        (3)  Dr.  Hill's  Lecture? 

Vot..  in  2o 


154  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

Terms  are  not  indeed  to  be  objected  to  merely  because  they  are 
not  found  in  the  word  of  God  ;  but  their  signification  must  be 
controlled  by  it,  otherwise,  as  in  the  case  of  the  term  decrees,  a 
meaning  is  often  silently  brought  in  under  covert  of  the  term,  which 
becomes  a  postulate  in  argument :  a  practice  which  has  been  a 
fruitful  source  of  misapprehension  and  error.  The  decrees  of  God, 
if  the  phrase  then  must  be  continued,  can  only  scripturally  signify 
the  determinations  of  his  will  in  his  government  of  the  world  he  has 
made  ;  and  those  determinations  are  plainly,  in  Scripture,  referred 
to  two  classes,  what  he  has  himself  determined  to  do,  and  what  he 
lias  determined  to  permit  to  be  done  by  free  and  accountable  crea- 
tures. He  determined,  for  instance,  to  create  man,  and  he  deter- 
mined to  permit  his  fall ;  he  determined  also  the  only  method  of 
dispensing  pardon  to  the  guilty,  but  he  determined  to  permit  men 
to  reject  it  and  to  fall  into  the  punishment  of  their  offences. 
Calvin,  indeed,  rejects  the  doctrine  of  permission.  "It  is  not  pro- 
bable," he  says,  "  that  man  procured  his  own  destruction  by  the 
mere  permission,  and  without  any  appointment  of  God."  He  had 
reason. for  this;  for  to  have  allowed  this  distinction  would  have 
been  contrary  to  the  main  principles  of  his  theological  system, 
which  are,  that  "  the  will  of  God  is  the  necessity  of  things,"  and  that 
all  things  are  previously  fixed  by  an  absolute  decree  ;  so  that  they 
must  happen.  The  consequence  is,  that  he  and  his  followers 
involve  themselves  in  the  tremendous  consequence  of  making  God 
the  author  of  sin ;  which,  after  all  their  disavowals,  and  we  grant 
them  sincere,  will  still  logically  cleave  to  them :  for  it  is  obvious, 
that  by  nothing  can  we  fairly  avoid  this  consequence  but  by  allow- 
ing the  distinction  between  determinations  to  do,  on  the  part  of 
God,  and  determinations  to  permit  certain  things  to  be  done  by 
others.  The  principle  laid  down  by  Calvin  is  destructive  of  all 
human  agency,  seeing  it  converts  man  into  a  mere  instrument; 
whilst  the  other  maintains  his  agency  in  its  proper  sense,  and,  there- 
fore, his  proper  accountability.  On  Calvin's  principle,  man  is  no 
more  an  agent  than  the  knife  in  the  hand  of  the  assassin ;  and  he 
is  not  more  responsible,  therefore,  in  equity,  to  punishment,  than 
the  knife  by  which  the  assassination  is  committed,  were  it  capable 
of  being  punished.  For  if  man  has  not  a  real  agency,  that  is,  if 
there  is  a  necessity  above  him  so  controlling  his  actions  as  to  render 
it  impossible  that  they  should  have  been  otherwise,  he  is  in  the  hands 
of  another,  and  not  master  of  himself,  and  so  his  actions  cease  to  be 
his  own. 

A  decree  to  permit  involves  no  such  consequences.  This  is  indeed 
acknowledged ;  but  then,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  urged  that  this 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  *5° 

imposes  an  uncertainty  upon  the  Divine  plans,  and  makes  him  de- 
pendent upon  the  acts  of  the  creature.  In  neither  of  these  allegations 
is  there  any  weight ;  for  as  to  the  first,  there  can  be  no  uncertainty 
in  the  principles  of  the  administration  of  a  Being  who  regulates  the- 
whole  by  the  immutable  rules  of  righteousness,  holiness,  truth,  and 
goodness  ;  so  that  all  the  acts  of  the  creature  do  but  call  forth  some 
new  illustration  of  his  unchangeable  regard  to  these  principles. 
Nor  can  any  act  of  a  creature  render  his  plans  uncertain  by  coming 
upon  him  by  surprise,  and  thus  oblige  him  to  alter  his  intentions  on 
the  spur  of  the  moment.     What  the  creature  will  do,  in  fact,  is 
known  beforehand  with  a  perfect  prescience,  which  yet,  as  we  have 
already  proved, (4)  interferes  not  with  the  liberty  of  our  actions; 
and  what  God  has  determined  to  do  in  consequence,  is  made  ap- 
parent by  what  he  actually  does,  which  with  him  can  be  no  new, 
no  sudden  thought,  but  known  and  purposed  from  eternity,  in  the 
view  of  the  actual  circumstances.    As  to  the  second  objection,  that 
this  makes  his  conduct  dependent  upon  the  acts  of  the  creature, 
so  far  from  denying  it,  we  may  affirm  it  to  be  one  of  the  plainest 
doctrines  of  the  word  of  God.  He  punishes  or  blesses  men  accord- 
ing to  their  conduct ;  and  he  waits  until  the  acts  of  their  sin  or  their 
obedience  take  place,  before  he  either  punishes  or  rewards.     The 
dealings  of  a  sovereign  judge  must,  in  the  nature  of  things  them- 
selves, be  dependent  upon  the  conduct  of  the  subjects  over  whom 
he  rules  :  they  must  vary  according  to  that  conduct ;  and  it  is  only 
in  the  principles  of.  a  righteous  government  that  we  ought  to  look, 
for  that  kind  of  immutability  which  has  any  thing  in  it  of  moral 
character.     Still  it  is  said,  that  though  the  acts  of  God,  as  a  sove- 
reign, change,  and  are,  apparently,  dependent  upon  the  conduct  of 
creatures,  yet  that  he,  from  all  eternity,  decreed,  or  determined  to 
do  them :  as  for  instance,  to  exalt  one  nation  and  to  abase  another  j 
to  favour  this  individual,  or  to  punish  that ;  to  save  this  man,  to 
destroy  the  other.     This  may  be  granted ;  but  only  in  this  sense, 
that  his  eternal  determination  or  decree  was  as  dependent  and  con- 
sequent upon  his  prescience  of  the  acts  which,  according  to  the 
immutable  principles  of  his  nature  and  government,  are  pleasing  or 
hateful  to  him,  as  the  actual  administration  of  favour  or  punishment 
is  upon  the  actual  conduct  of  men  in  time.     This  brings  on  the 
question  of  decrees  absolute  or  conditional;  and  ..we  are,  happily, 
not  left  to  the  reasonings  of  .men  on  this  point ;  but  have  the  light 
of  the  word  of  God,  which  abounds  with  examples  of  decrees,  to 
which  conditions  am  annexed,  on  the  performance  or  neglect  of 
which,  by  his  creatures,  their  execution  is  made  dependent.     "  If 
thou  doest  well,  shalt  thou  not  be  accepted  1  but  if  thou  docst  not 

<T)Part  ii,c.  4. 


15C  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTED  [PART 

well,  sin  lieth  at  the  door."  If  this  was  God's  eternal  decree  con- 
cerning Cain,  then  it  was  plainly  conditional  from  eternity ;  for  his 
decrees  in  time  cannot  contradict  his  decrees  from  eternity,  as  to 
the  same  persons  and  events.  But  Cain  did  "  not  well ;"  was  it 
not,  then,  says  a  Calvinist,  eternally  and  absolutely  decreed  that 
he  should  not  "  do  well  ?"  The  reply  is  no  ;  because  this  supposed 
absolute  decree  of  the  Calvinist  would  contradict  the  revealed 
decree  or  determination  of  God,  to  put  both  the  doing  well  and  the 
doing  ill  into  Cain's  own  power,  which  is  utterly  inconsistent  with 
an  absolute  decree  that  he  should  have  it  in  his  power  only  to  do 
ill ;  and  the  inevitable  conclusion,  therefore,  is,  that  the  only  eternal 
decree,  or  Divine  determination  concerning  Cain  in  this  matter 
was,  that  he  should  be  conditionally  accepted,  or  conditionally  left 
to  the  punishment  of  his  sins.  To  this  class  of  conditional  decrees 
belong  also  all  such  passages,  as  "  If  ye  be  willing  and  obedient  ye 
shall  eat  the  good  of  the  land  ;  but  if  ye.  refuse  and  rebel  ye  shall 
be  devoured  by  the  sword."  "  If  ye  live  after  the  flesh  ye  shall  die  ; 
but  if  ye,  through  the  Spirit,  do  mortify  the  deeds  of  the  body,  ye 
shall  live."  "  He  that  bclieveth  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  be- 
lieveth  not  shall  be  damned."  This  last,  especially,  is  God's  decree 
or  determination,  as  to  all  who  hear  the  Gospel,  to  the  end  of  time. 
It  professes  to  be  so  on  the  very  face  of  it,  for  its  general  and  un- 
restricted nature  cannot  be  denied ;  but  if  we  are  told,  that  there 
is  a  decree  affecting  numbers  of  men  as  individuals,  by  which  God 
determined  absolutely  to  pass  them  by,  and  to  deny  to  them  the 
grace  of  faith,  such  an  allegation  cannot  be  true  ;  because  it  con- 
tradicts the  decree  as  revealed  by  God  himself.  His  decree  gives 
to  all  who  hear  the  news  of  Christ's  salvation,  the  alternative  of 
believing  and  being  saved,  of  not  believing  and  being  damned ;  but 
there  is  no  alternative  in  the  absolute  decree  of  Calvinism :  as  to 
the  reprobate,  no  one  can  believe  and  be  saved  who  is  under  such 
decree  ;  God  never  intended  he  should  ;  and,  therefore,  he  is  put 
by  one  decree  in  one  condition,  and  by  another  decree  in  an  entirely 
opposite  condition,  which  is  an  obvious  contradiction. 

But  we  have  instances  of  the  revocation  of  God's  decrees,  as  well 
as  of  their  conditional  character,  one  of  which  will  be  sufficient  for 
illustration.  In  the  case  of  Eli,  "  I  said  indeed  that  thy  house  and 
the  house  of  thy  father  should  walls,  before  me  for  ever ;  but  now 
the  Lord  saith,  be  it  far  from  me  ;  for  them  that  honour  me  I  will 
honour,  and  they  that  despise  me  shall  be  lightly  esteemed."  No 
passage  can  more  strongly  refute  the  Calvinistic  notion  of  God's 
immutability,  which  they  seem  to  place  in  his  never  changing  his 
purpose,  whereas,  in  fact,  the  scriptural  doctrine  is,  that  it  consists 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  157 

in  his  never  changing  the  principles  of  his  administration.  One  of 
those  principles  is  laid  down  in  this  passage.  It  is,  "them  that 
honour  me  I  will  honour,  and  they  that  despise  me  shall  be  lightly 
esteemed."  To  this  principle  God  is  immutably  true  ;  but  it  was 
his  unchangeable  regard  to  that  very  principle  which  brought  on 
the  change  of  his  conduct  towards  the  house  of  Eli,  and  induced 
him  to  revoke  his  former  promise.  This  is  the  only  immutability 
worthy  of  God,  or  which  can  be  reconciled  to  the  facts  of  his 
government.  For  either  the  advocate  of  absolute  predestination 
must  say  that  the  promises  and  threatenings  are  declarations  of  his 
will  and  purposes,  or  they  are  not.  If  they  are  not,  they  contradict 
his  truth ;  but  if  the  point,  that  they  do  in  fact  declare  his  will  is 
conceded,  that  will  is  either  absolute  or  conditional.  Let  us  then 
try  the  case  of  Eli  by  this  alternative.  If  the  promise  of  continuing 
the  priesthood  in  the  family  of  Eli  were  absolute,  then  it  could  not 
be  revoked.  If  the  threatening  expressed  an  absolute  and  eternal 
will  and  determination  to  divert  the  priesthood  from  Eli's  progeny, 
then  the  promise  was  a  mockery ;  and  God  is  in  this,  and  all  similar 
instances,  made  to  engage  himself  to  do  what  is  contrary  to  his 
absolute  intention  and  determination  :  in  other  words,  he  makes  no 
engagement  in  fact,  whilst  he  seems  to  do  it  in  form,  which  involves 
a  charge  against  the  Divine  Being  which  few  Calvinists  would  be 
bold  enough  to  maintain.  But  if  these  declarations  to  Eli  be 
regarded  as  the  expressions  of  a  determination  always  taken,  in  the 
mind  of  God,  under  the  conditions  implied  in  the  fixed  principles  of 
his  government,  then  the  language  and  the  acts  of  God  harmonize 
with  his  sincerity  and  faithfulness,  and,  instead  of  throwing  a  shade 
over  his  moral  attributes,  illustrate  his  immutable  regard  to  those 
wise,  equitable,  and  holy  rules  by  which  he  conducts  his  govern- 
ment of  moral  agents.  Nor  will  the  distinction  which  some  Cal- 
vinists have  endeavoured  to  establish  between  the  promises  and 
threatenings  of  God  and  his  decrees,  serve  them  ;  for  where  is  it  to 
be  found  except  in  their  own  imagination  1  We  have  no  intimation 
of  such  a  distinction  in  Scripture,  which,  nevertheless,  professes  to 
reveal  the  eternal  "purpose"  and  "  counsel"  of  God  on  those  matters 
to  which  his  promises  and  threatenings  relate, — the  salvation  or 
destruction  of  men.  That  counsel  and  purpose  has,  also,  no  mani- 
festation in  his  word,  but  by  promises  and  threatenings  ;  these  make 
up  its  whole  substance,  and,  therefore,  in  order  to  make  their  dis- 
tinction good,  those  who  hold  it  must  discover  a  distinction  not  only 
between  God's  promises  and  threatenings  and  his  decrees  ;  but  be- 
tween the  eternal  "counsels  and  purposes"  of  God  and  his  decrees, 
which  they  acknowledge  to  be  identical- 


lo8  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

The  fallacy  which  seems  to  mislead  them  appears  to  be  the 
following :  They  allege  that  of  two  consequences,  say  the  obedi- 
ence or  disobedience  of  Eli's  house,  we  acknowledge,  on  both  sides, 
that  one  will  happen.  That  which  actually  happens  we  also  see 
taken  up  into  the  course  of  the  Divine  administration,  and  made  a 
part  of  his  subsequent  plan  of  government,  as  the  transfer  of  the 
priesthood  from  the  house  of  Eli :  they,  therefore,  argue  that  the 
Divine  Being  having  his  plan  before  him,  and  this  very  circumstance 
entering  into  it,  it  was  fixed  from  eternity  as  a  part  of  that  general 
scheme  by  which  the  purposes  of  God  were  to  be  accomplished, 
and  which  would  have  been  uncertain  and  unarranged  but  for  this 
preordination.     The  answer  to  this  is, 

1.  That  the  circumstance  of  an  event  being  taken  up  into  the 
Divine  administration,  and  being  made  use  of  to  work  out  God's 
purposes,  is  no  proof  that  he  willed  and  decreed  it.  He  could  not 
will  the  wickedness  of  Eli's  sons,  and  could  not,  therefore,  ordain 
and  appoint  it,  or  his  decrees  would  be  contrary  to  his  will.  The 
making  use  of  the  result  of  the  choice  of  a  free  agent  only  proves 
that  it  was  foreseen,  and  that  there  are,  so  to  speak,  infinite 
resources  in  the  Divine  mind  to  turn  the  actions  of  men  into  the 
accomplishment  of  his  plans,  without  either  willing  them  when  they 
are  evil,  or  imposing  fetters  upon  their  freedom. 

2.  That  though  an  event  be  interwoven  with  the  course  of  the 
Divine  government,  it  does  not  follow  that  it  was  necessary  to  it. 
The  ends  of  a  course  of  administration  might  have  been  otherwise 
accomplished  ;  as,  in  the  case  before  us,  if  Eli's  house  had  remained 
faithful,  and  the  family  of  Zadok  had  not  been  chosen  in  its  stead. 
The  general  plan  of  God's  government  does  not,  therefore,  neces- 
sarily include  every  event  which  happens  as  a  necessary  part  of  its 
accomplishment,  since  the  same  results  might,  in  many  cases,  have 
been  brought  out  of  other  events ;  and,  therefore,  it  cannot  be 
conclusively  argued,  that  as  God  wills  the  accomplishment  of  the 
general  plan,  he  must  will  in  the  same  manner  the  particular  events 
which  he  may  overrule  to  contribute  to  it     But, 

3.  As  to  the  general  plan,  it  is  also  an  unfounded  assumption, 
that  it  was  the  subject  of  an  absolute  determination.  From  this 
lias  arisen  the  notion  that  the  fall  of  Adam  was  willed  and  decreed 
by  God.  To  this  doctrine,  which,  for  the  sake  of  a  metaphysical 
speculation,  draws  after  it  so  many  abhorrent  and  antiscriptural 
consequences,  we  must  Semtir.  God  could  not  will  that  event 
actively  without  willing  sin ;  he  could  not  absolutely  decree  it 
without  removing  all  responsibility,  and,  therefore,  all  fault,  from 
'he  first  offender.  If  God  be  holy  he  could  no*t  will  Adam's  offence, 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  159 

though  he  might  determine  not  to  prevent  it  by  interfering  with 
man's  freedom,  which  is  a  very  different  case  ;  and  if  in  guarding 
his  law  from  violation  by  a  severe  sanction  he  proceeded  with 
sincerity,  he  could  not  appoint  its  violation.  We  may  confidently 
say,  that  he  willed  the  contrary  of  Adam's  offence  ;  and  that  he 
used  all  means,  consistent  with  his  determination  to  give  and  main- 
tain free  agency  to  his  creatures,  to  secure  the  accomplishment  of 
that  will.  It  was  against  his  will,  therefore,  that  our  progenitors 
sinned  and  fell ;  and  his  "  purpose"  and  "  counsel,"  or  his  decree, 
if  the  term  please  better,  to  govern  the'  world  according  to  the 
principles  and  mode  now  in  operation,  was  dependent  upon  an  event 
which  he  willed  not ;  but  which,  as  being  foreseen,  was  the  plan- 
he,  in  wisdom,  justice,  and  mercy,  adopted  in  the  view  of  this  con- 
tingency. And  suppose  we  were  to  acknowledge  with  some,  that 
the  result  will  be  more  glorious  to  him,  and  more  beneficial  to  the 
universe,  through  the  wisdom  with  which  he  overrules  all  thing's, 
than  if  Adam  and  his  descendants  had  stood  in  their  innocency,  it 
will  not  follow,  even  from  this,  that  the  present  was  that  order  of 
events  which  God  absolutely  ordered  and  decreed.  We  are  told, 
indeed,  that  if  this  was  the  best  of  possible  plans,  God  was,  by  the 
perfection  of  his  nature,  bound  to  choose  it ;  and  that  if  he  chose 
it,  his  will,  in  this  respect,  made  all  the  rest  necessary.  But,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  presumption  of  determining  what  God  was  bound  to 
do  in  any  hypothetic  case,  the  position  that  God  must  choose  the 
best  of  possible  plans  is  to  be  taken  with  qualification.  We  can 
neither  prove  that  the  state  of  things  which  shall  actually  issue  is 
the  best  among  those  possible ;  nor  that  among  possible  systems 
there  can  'be  a  best,  since  they  are  all  composed  of  created  things, 
and  no  system  can  actually  exist,  to  which  the  Creator,  who  is 
infinite  in  power,  could  not  add  something.  Were  no  sin  involved 
in  the  case  it  would  be  clearer  ;  but  it  is  not  only  unsupported  by 
any  declaration  of  Scripture,  but  certainly  contrary  to  many  of  its 
principles,  to  assume  that  God  originally,  so  to  speak,  and,  in  the 
first  instance,  willed  and  decreed  a  state  of  things  which  should 
necessarily  include  the  introduction  of  moral  evil  into  his  creation, 
in  order  to  manifest  his  glory  and  work  out  future  good  to  the 
creature ;  because  we  know  that  sin  is  that  "  abominable  thing'' 
which  he  hateth.  A  monarch  is  surely  not  bound  secretly  to  ap- 
point and  decree  the  circumstances  which  must  necessarily  lead  to  a 
rebellion,  in  order  that  his  clemency  may  be  more  fully  manifested 
in  pardoning  the  rebels,  or  the  strength  of  his  government  displayed 
in.their  subjugation ;  although  his  subjects,  upon  the  whole,  might 
derive  some  higher  benefit.     We  may,  therefore,  conclude  that 


itJO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

God  willed  with  perfect  truth  and  sincerity  that  man  should  not 
fall,  although  he  resolved  not  to  prevent  that  fall  by  interfering  with 
his  freedom,  Avhich  would  have  changed  the  whole  character  of  his 
government  towards  rational  creatures ;  and  that  his  plan,  or  decree, 
to  govern  the  world  upon  the  principle  of  redemption  and  mediation 
was  no  absolute  ordination,  but  conditional  upon  man's  offence ;  and 
was  an  "  eternal  purpose,"  only  in  the  eternal  foresight  of  the  actual 
occurrence  of  the  fall  of  man,  which  yet,  it  is  no  contradiction  to 
say,  was  against  his  will. 

So  fallacious  are  all  such  notions  as  to  God's  fixed  plans.  Fixed 
they  may  be,  without  being  absolutely  decreed ;  because  fixed,  in 
reference  to  what  takes  place,  even  in  opposition  to  his  will  and 
intention ;  and  as  to  the  argument  drawn  by  Calvinists  from  the 
perfections  of  God,  it  is  surely  a  more  honourable  view  of  him  to 
suppose  that  his  will  and  his  promulgated  law  accord  and  consent, 
than  that  they  are  in  opposition  to  each  other ;  more  honourable  to 
him,  that  he  is  immutable  in  his  adherence  to  the  principles,  rather 
than  in  the  acts  of  government ;  more  honourable  to  him,  that  he 
can  make  the  conduct  of  his  free  creatures  to  work  out  either  his 
original  purposes,  or  purposes  more  glorious  to  himself  and  beneficial 
to  the  universe,  than  that  he  should  frame  plans  so  fixed  as  to  have 
no  reference  to  the  free  actions  of  creatures,  whom,  by  a  strange 
contradiction,  he  is  represented  as  still  holding  accountable  for  their 
conduct ;  plans  which  all  these  creatures  shall  be  necessitated  to 
fulfil,  so  as  to  be  capable  of  no  other  course  of  action  whatever,  or 
else  that  his  government  must  become  loose  and  uncertain.  This 
is,  indeed,  to  have  low  thoughts,  even  of  the  infinite  wisdom  of  God  ; 
and  either  involves  his  justice  and  truth  in  deep  obscurity,  or  pre- 
sents them  to  us  under  very  equivocal  aspects.  Which  of  these 
views  is  the  most  consonant  with  the  Bible,  may  be  safely  left  with 
the  candid  reader. 

The  Prescience  of  God  is  also  a  subject  by  which  Calvinists 
have  endeavoured  to  give  some  plausibility  to  their  system.  The 
argument,  as  popularly  stated,  has  been,  that,  as  the  destruction  or 
salvation  of  every  individual  is  foreseen,  it  is,  therefore,  certain,  and, 
as  certain,  it  is  inevitable  and  necessary.  The  answer  to  this  is,  that 
certainty  and  necessity  are  not  at  all  connected  in  the  nature  of 
things,  and  are,  in  fact,  two  perfectly  distinct  predicaments.  Cer- 
tainty has  no  relation  to  an  event  at  all  as  evitable  or  inevitable, 
free  or  compelled,  contingent  or  necessary.  It  relates  only  to  the 
issue  itself,  the  act  of  any  agent,  not  to  the  quality  of  the  act  or 
event  with  reference  to  the  circumstances  under  which  it  is  pro- 
duced.    A  free  action  is  as  much  an  event  as  a  necessitated  one, 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  161 

and,  therefore,  is  as  truly  an  object  of  foresight,  which  foresight 
cannot  change  the  nature  of  the  action,  or  of  the  process  through 
which  it  issues,  because  the  simple  knowledge  of  an  action,  whether 
present,  past,  or  to  come,  has  no  influence  upon  it  of  any  kind. 
Certainty  is,  in  fact,  no  quality  of  an  action  at  all ;  it  exists,  properly 
speaking,  in  the  mind  foreseeing,  and  not  in  the  action  foreseen ; 
but  freedom  or  constraint,  contingency  or  necessity  qualify  the 
action  itself,  and  determine  its  nature,  and  the  rewardableness,  or 
punitive  demerit  of  the  agent.  When,  therefore,  it  is  said,  that  what 
God  foresees  will  certainly  happen,  nothing  more  can  be  reasonably 
meant,  than  that  he  is  certain  that  it  will  happen  ;  so  that  we  must 
not  transfer  the  certainty  from  God  to  the  action  itself,  in  the  false 
sense  of  necessity,  or,  indeed,  in  any  sense  ;  for  the  certainty  is  in 
the  Divine  mind,  and  stands  there  opposed,  not  to  the  contingency 
of  the  action,  but  to  doubtfulness  as  to  his  own  prescience  of  the 
result.  There  is  this  certainty  in  the  Divine  mind  as  to  the  actions 
of  men,  that  they  icill  happen  :  but  that  they  must  happen  cannot 
follow  from  this  circumstance.  If  they  must  happen,  they  are 
under  some  control  which  prevents  a  different  result ;  but  the  most 
certain  knowledge  has  nothing  in  it  which,  from  its  nature,  can 
control  an  action  in  any  way,  unless  it  should  lead  the  being  en- 
dowed with  it  to  adopt  measures  to  influence  the  action,  and  then 
it  becomes  a  question,  not  of  foreknowledge,  but  of  power  and 
influence,  which  wholly  changes  the  case.  This  is  a  sufficient  reply 
to  the  popular  manner  of  stating  the  argument.  The  scholastic 
method  requires  a  little  more  illustration. 

The  knowledge  of  possible  things,  as  existing  from  all  eternity 
in  the  Divine  understanding,  has  been  termed  "  scientia  simplicis 
hitelligcntioi"  or  by  the  schoolmen,  "scientia  indefinita"  as  not 
determining  the  existence  of  any  thing.  The  knowledge  which 
God  had  of  all  real  existences  is  termed  "  scientia  visionis"  and  by 
the  schoolmen,  "scientia  dejinita"  because  the  existence  of  all  objects 
of  this  knowledge  is  determinate  and  certain.  To  these  distinctions 
another  was  added  by  those  who  rejected  the  predestinarian  hypo- 
thesis, to  which  they  gave  the  name  "scientia  media"  as  being 
supposed  to  stand  in  the  middle  between  the  two  former.  By  this 
is  understood,  the  knowledge,  neither  of  things  as  possible,  nor  of 
events  appointed  and  decreed  by  God ;  but  of  events  which  are  to 
happen  upon  certain  conditions.  (5) 

(5)  "  Ordo  autem  hie  ut  rcctc  intelligi  possit,  observandum  est  triplicem  Deo 
ecientiam  tribui  solerc  :  unam  nccessariam,  quae  omnem  voluntatis  liberie  actum 
naturae  ordine  antecedit,  quae  etiam  practica  et  simplicis  intellig entice  dici  potest, 
qua  seipsum  et  alia  omnia  pogsibilia  intelligit.   Alteram  libefam,  qua  consequitm* 

Vol.  ID  21 


162 


THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  (PART 


The  third  kind  of  knowledge,  or  scientia  media,  might  very  well 
be  included  in  the  second,  since  scientia  visionis  ought  to  include  not 
what  God  will  do,  and  what  his  creatures  will  do  under  his  appoint- 
ment, but  what  they  will  do  by  his  permission  as  free  agents,  and 
what  he  will  do,  as  a  consequence  of  this,  in  his  character  of 
Governor  and  Lord.  But  since  the  predestinarians  had  confounded 
scientia  visionis  with  a  predestinating  decree,  the  scientia  media  well 
expressed  what  they  had  left  quite  unaccounted  for,  and  which 
they  had  assumed  did  not  really  exist, — the  actions  of  creatures 
endowed  with  free  will,  and  the  acts  of  Deity  which  from  eternity 
were  consequent  upon  them.  If  such  actions  do  not  take  place, 
then  men  are  not  free ;  and  if  the  rectoral  acts  of  God  are  not 
consequent  upon  the  actions  of  the  creature  in  the  order  of  the 
Divine  intention,  and  the  conduct  of  the  creature  is  consequent 
upon  the  foreordained  rectoral  acts  of  God,  then  we  reach  a  ne- 
cessitating eternal  decree,  which,  infact,the  predestinarian  contends 
for :  but  it  unfortunately  brings  after  it  consequences  which  no 
subtilties  have  ever  been  able  to  shake  off, — that  the  only  actor  in 
the  universe  is  God  himself;  and  that  the  only  distinction  among 
events  is,  that  one  class  is  brought  to  pass  by  God  directly,  and  the 
other  indirectly;  not  by  the  agency,  but  by  the  mere  instrumentality, 
of  his  creatures. 

The  manner  in  which  absolute  predestination  is  made  identical 
with  scientia  visionis,  will  be  best  illustrated  by  an  extract  from  the 
writings  of  a  tolerably  fair  and  temperate  modern  Calvinist.  Speak- 
ing of  the  two  distinctions,  scientia  simplicis  intelligentice.  and  scientia 
visionis,  he  says, 

"  Those  who  consider  all  the  objects  of  knowledge  as  compre- 
hended under  one  or  other  of  the  kinds  that  have  been  explained, 
are  naturally  conducted  to  that  enlarged  conception  of  the  extent 
of  the  Divine  decree,  from  which  the  Calvinistic  doctrine  of  pre- 
destination unavoidably  follows.  The  Divine  decree  is  the  deter- 
mination of  the  Divine  will  to  produce  the  universe,  that  is,  the 
whole  series  of  beings  and  events  that  were  then  future.  The  parts 
of  this  series  arise  in  succession ;  but  all  were,  from  eternity,  present 
to  the  Divine  mind  ;  and  no  cause  was,  at  any  time,  to  operate,  or 
no  effect  that  was  at  any  time  to  be  produced  in  the  universe,  can 
be  excluded  from  the  original  decree,  without  supposing  that  the 

actum  voluntatis  liberae,  quae  etiam  visionis  dici  potest ;  qua.  Deus  omnia,  quse 
facere  et  permittere  decrevit  ita  distincte  novit,  uti  ea  fieri  et  permittere  voluit. 
Tertiam  median,  qua  sub  conditione  novit  quid  homines  aut  angeli  facturi  essent 
pro  sua  libertate,si  cum  his  autillis  circumstantiis,  in  hoc  velin  illo  rerum  ordiirej 
constituerentur."— Disputat.  Episcopii,  Parti,  Disp.  v, 


4EC0iST>.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  1(33 

decree  was  at  first  imperfect  and  afterwards  received  accessions* 
The  determination  to  produce  this  world,  understanding  by  that 
word  the  whole  combination  of  beings,  and  causes,  and  effects,  that 
were  to  come  into  existence,  arose  out  of  the  view  of  all  possible 
worlds,  and  proceeded  upon  reasons  to  us  unsearchable,  by  which 
this  world  that  now  exists  appeared  to  the  Divine  wisdom  the  fittest 
to  be  produced.  I  say,  the  determination  to  produce  this  world 
proceeded  upon  reasons  ;  because,  we  must  suppose,  that  in  forming 
the  decrees,  a  choice  was  exerted,  that  the  Supreme  Being  was  at 
liberty  to  resolve  either  that  he  would  create  or  that  he  would  not 
create  ;  that  he  would  give  his  work  this  form  or  that  form,  as  he 
chose  ;  otherwise  we  withdraw  from  the  Supreme  Intelligence,  and 
subject  all  things  to  blind  fatality.  But  if  a  choice  was  exerted  in 
forming  the  decree,  the  choice  must  have  proceeded  upon  reasons ; 
for  a  choice  made  by  a  wise  Being,  without  any  ground  of  choice, 
is  a  contradiction  in  terms.  At  the  same  time  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered, that  as  nothing  then  existed  but  the  Supreme  Being,  the  only 
reason  which  could  determine  him  in  choosing  what  he  was  to 
produce,  was  its  appearing  to  him  fitter  for  accomplishing  the  end 
which  he  proposed  to  himself  than  any  thing  else  which  he  might 
have  produced.  Hence  scientia  visionis  is  called  by  theologians 
scientla  libera.  \  To  scientia  simplicis  intelligent'uB  they  gave  the 
epithet  naturalis,  because  the  knowledge  of  all  things  possible  arises 
necessarily  from  the  nature  of  the  Supreme  mind ;  but  to  scientia 
visionis  they  gave  the  epithet  libera,  because  the  qualities  and  extent 
of  its  objects  are  determined,  not  by  any  necessity  of  nature,  but 
by  the  will  of  the  Deity.  Although  in  forming  the  Divine  decree 
there  was  a  choice  of  this  world,  proceeding  upon  a  representa- 
tion of  all  possible  worlds,  it  is  not  to  be  conceived,  that  there  was 
any  interval  between  the  choice  and  representation,  or  any  succes- 
sion in  the  parts  of  the  choice.  In  the  Divine  mind  there  was  an 
intuitive  view  of  that  immense  subject,  which  it  is  not  only  impossible 
for  our  minds  to  comprehend  at  once,  but  in  travelling  through 
the  parts  of  which  we  are  instantly  bewildered ;  and  one  degree, 
embracing  at  once  the  end  and  means,  ordained  with  perfect  wisdom 
all  that  was  to  be. 

"  The  condition  of  the  human  race  entered  into  this  decree.  It 
is  not,  perhaps,  the  most  important  part  of  it  when  we  speak  of  the 
formation  of  the  universe,  but  it  is  a  part  which,  even  were  it  more 
insignificant  than  it  is,  could  not  be  overlooked  by  the  Almighty, 
whose  attention  extends  to  all  his  works,  and  which  appears,  by 
those  dispensations  of  his  Providence  that  have  been  made  known 
to  us,  to  be  interesting  in  his  eyes.     A  decree  respecting  the  con'- 


164  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

dition  of  the  human  race  includes  the  history  of  every  individual : 
the  time  of  his  appearing  upon  the  earth  ;  the  manner  of  his  exist- 
ence while  he  is  an  inhabitant  of  the  earth,  as  it  is  diversified  by  the 
actions  which  he  performs,  and  by  the  events,  whether  prosperous 
or  calamitous,  which  befall  him,  and  the  manner  of  his  existence 
after  he  leaves  the  earth,  that  is,  future  happiness  or  misery.  A 
decree  respecting  the  condition  of  the  human  race  also  includes  the 
relations  of  the  individuals  to  one  another :  it  fixes  their  connexions 
in  society,  which  have  a  great  influence  upon  their  happiness  and 
their  improvement ;  and  it  must  be  conceived  as  extending  to  the 
important  events  recorded  in  Scripture,  in  which  the  whole  species 
have  a  concern.  Of  this  kind  is  the  sin  of  our  first  parents,  the 
consequence  of  that  sin  reaching  to  all  their  posterity,  the  mediation 
of  Jesus  Christ  appointed  by  God  as  a  remedy  for  these  conse- 
quences, the  final  salvation,  through  his  mediation,  of  one  part  of 
the  descendants  of  Adam,  and  the  final  condemnation  of  another 
part,  notwithstanding  the  remedy.  These  events  arise  at  long' 
intervals  of  time,  by  a  gradual  preparation  of  circumstances,  and 
the  operation  of  various  means.  But  by  the  Creator,  to  whose 
mind  the  end  and  means  were  at  once  present,  these  events  were 
beheld  in  intimate  connexion  with  one  another,  and  in  conjunction 
with  many  other  events  to  us  unknown,  and  consequently  all  of 
them,  however  far  removed  from  one  another  as  to  the  time  of  their 
actual  existence,  were  comprehended  in  that  one  decree  by  which 
he  determined  to  produce  the  world." (6) 

Now  some  things  in  this  statement  may  be  granted ;  as  for  in- 
stance, that  when  the  choice,  speaking  after  the  manner  of  men, 
was  between  creating  the  world  and  not  creating  it,  it  appeared 
litter  to  God  to  create  than  not  to  create ;  and  that  all  actual 
events  were  foreseen,  and  will  take  place,  so  far  as  they  are  future, 
as  they  are  foreseen ;  but  where  is  the  connexion  between  these 
points,  and  that  absolute  decree  which  in  this  passage  is  taken  for 
either  the  same  thing  as  foreseeing,  or  as  necessarily  involved  in  it  ?• 
"  The  Divine  decree,"  says  Dr.  Hill,  "  is  the  determination  of  the 
Divine  will  to  produce  the  universe,  that  is,  the  whole  series  of  beings 
and  events  that  were  then  future."  If  so,  it  follows,  that  it  was  the 
Divine  will  to  produce  the  fall  of  man,  as  well  as  his  creation  ;  the 
offences  which  made  redemption  necessary,  as  the  redemption  itself: 
to  produce  the  destruction  of  human  beings,  and  their  vices  which 
are  the  means  of  that  destruction ;  the  salvation  of  another  part  of 
the  race,  and  their  faith  and  obedience,  as  the  means  of  that  salva- 
tion:— for  by  "one  decree,  embracing  at  once  the  end  and  the 
(6)  Hill's  Lee.  vol.  in,  p.  3.8. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  1&» 

means,  he  ordained,  with  perfect  wisdom,  all  that  was  to  be."  This 
is  in  the  true  character  of  the  Calvinistic  theology  ;  it  dogmatises 
with  absolute  confidence  on  some  metaphysical  assumption,  and 
forgets  for  the  time,  that  any  such  book  as  the  Bible,  a  revelation 
of  God,  by  God  himself,  exists  in  the  world.  If  the  determination 
of  the  Divine  will,  with  respect  to  the  creation  of  man,  were  the 
same  kind  of  determination  as  that  which  respected  his  fall,  how 
then  are  we  to  account  for  the  means  taken  by  God  to  prevent  the 
fall,  which  were  no  less  than  the  communication  of  an  upright  and 
perfect  nature  to  man,  from  which  his  ability  to  stand  in  his  upright- 
ness arose,  and  the  threatening  of  the  greatest  calamity,  death,  in 
order  to  deter  him  from  the  act  of  offence  1  How,  in  that  case,  are 
we  to  account  for  the  declarations  of  God's  hatred  to  sin,  and  for 
his  own  express  declaration  that  "  he  w'dleth  not  the  death  of  him 
that  dieth  ?"  How,  for  the  obstructions  he  has  placed  in  the  way 
of  transgression,  which  would  be  obstructions  to  his  own  determi- 
nations, if  they  can  be  allowed  to  be  obstructions  at  all  1  How,  for 
the  intercession  of  Christ  1  How,  for  his  tears  shed  over  Jerusalem  1 
Finally,  how,  for  the  declaration  that  "  he  willeth  all  men  to  be 
saved,"  and  for  his  invitations  to  all,  and  the  promises  made  to  all  1 
Here  the  discrepancies  between  the  metaphysical  scheme  and  the 
written  word  are  most  strongly  marked  ;  are  so  totally  irreconcila- 
ble to  each  other,  as  to  leave  us  to  choose  between  the  speculations 
of  man,  as  to  the  operations  of  the  Divine  mind,  and  the  declared 
will  of  God  himself.  The  fact  is,  that  Scripture  can  only  be  inter- 
preted by  denying  that  the  determination  of  the  Divine  will  is,  as  to 
"  beings  and  events,"  the  same  kind  of  determination  ;  and  we  are 
necessarily  brought  back  again  to  the  only  distinction  which  is  com- 
patible with  the  written  word,  a  determination  in  God  to  do,  and  a 
determination  to  permit.  For  if  we  admit  that  the  decree  to  effect 
or  produce  is  absolute,  both  "  as  to  the  end  and  means,"  then, 
beside  the  consequences  which  follow  as  above  stated,  and  which 
so  directly  contradict  the  testimony  of  God  himself;  another  equally 
revolting  also  arises,  namely,  that  as  the  end  decreed  is,  as  we  are 
told,  most  glorious  to  God,  so  the  means,  being  controlled  and 
directed  to  that  end,  are  necessarily  and  directly  connected  with 
the  glorification  of  God ;  and,  so  men  glorify  God  by  their  vices, 
because  by  them  they  fulfil  his  will,  and  work  out  his  designs  ac- 
cording to  the  appointment  of  his  "  wisdom."  That  this  has  beeji 
boldly  contended  for  by  leading  Calvinistic  divines  in  former  times, 
and  by  some,  though  of  a  lower  class,  in  the  present  day,  is  well 
known :  and  that  they  are  consistent  in  their  deductions  from  the 
above  premises,  is  so  obvious,  that  it.  is  matter  of  surprise,  that  those 


166  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

Calvinists  who  are  shocked  at  this  conclusion  should  not  either 
suspect  the  principles  from  which  it  so  certainly  flows,  or  that, 
admitting  the  doctrine,  they  should  shun  the  explicit  avowal  of  the 
inevitable  consequence. 

The  sophistry  of  the  above  statement  of  the  Calvinistic  view  of 
prescience  and  the  decrees,  as  given  by  Dr.  Hill,  lies  in  this,  that 
the  determination  of  the  Divine  will  to  produce  the  universe  is  made 
to  include  a  determination  as  absolute  "to  produce  the  whole 
series  of  beings  and  events  that  were  then  future  ;"  and  in  assum- 
ing that  this  is  involved  in  a  perfect  prescience  of  things,  as  actually 
to  exist  and  take  place.  But  among  the  "  beings"  to  be  produced, 
were  not  only  beings  bound  by  their  instincts,  and  by  circumstances 
which  they  could  not  control,  to  act  in  some  given  manner ;  but 
also  beings  endowed  with  such  freedom  that  they  might  act  in 
different  and  opposite  ways,  as  their  own  will  might  determine. 
Either  this  must  be  allowed  or  denied.  If  it  is  denied,  then  man  is 
not  a  free  agent,  and,  therefore,  not  accountable  for  his  personal 
offences,  if  offences  those  acts  can  be  called,  to  the  doing  of  which 
{here  is  "  a  determination  of  the  Divine  will,"  of  the  same  nature 
as  to  the  "  producing  of  the  universe"  itself.  This,  however,  is  so 
destructive  of  the  nature  of  virtue  and  vice  ;  it  so  entirely  subverts 
the  moral  government  of  God  by  merging  it  into  his  natural  govern- 
ment ;  and  it  so  manifestly  contradicts  the  word  of  God,  which,  from 
the  beginning  to  the  end,  supposes  a  power  bestowed  on  man  to 
avoid  sin,  and  on  this  establishes  his  accountableness ;  that,  with 
all  these  fatal  consequences  hanging  upon  it,  we  may  leave  this 
notion  to  its  own  fate.  But  if  any  such  freedom  be  allowed  to  man, 
(either  actually  enjoyed  or  placed  within  his  reach  by  the  use  of 
means  which  are  within  his  power,)  that  he  may  both  will  and  act 
differently,  in  any  given  case,  from  his  ultimate  volitions  and  the 
acts  resulting  therefrom,  then  cannot  that  which  he  actually  does, 
as  a  free  agent,  say  some  sinful  act,  have  been  "  determined"  hi 
the  same  manner  by  the  Divine  will,  as  the  "  production"  of  the 
universe  and  the  "  beings"  which  compose  it.  For  if  man  is  a 
being  free  to  sin  or  not  to  sin ;  and  it  was  the  "  determination  of 
the  Divine  will"  to  produce  such  a  being  ;  it  was  his  determination 
to  give  to  him  this  liberty  of  not  doing  that  which  actually  he  does ; 
which  is  wholly  contrary  to  a  determination  that  he  should  act  in 
one  given  manner,  and  in  that  alone.  For  here,  on  the  one  hand, 
it  is  alleged  that  the  Divine  will  absolutely  determines  to  produce 
certain  " events"  and  yet  on  the  other  it  is  plain  that  he  absolutely 
determined  to  produce  "  beings"  who  should,  by  his  will  and  con- 
sequent endowment,  have  in  themselves  the  power  to  produce  con- 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  167 

trary  events  ;  propositions  which  manifestly  fight  with  each  other, 
and  cannot  both  be  true.  We  must  either,  then,  give  up  man's  free 
agency  and  true  accountability,  or  this  absolute  determination  of 
events.  The  former  cannot  be  renounced  without  involving  the 
consequences  above  stated  ;  and  the  abandoning  of  the  latter,  brings 
us  to  the  only  conclusion  which  agrees  with  the  word  of  God, — 
that  the  acts  of  free  agents  are  not  determined,  but  foreseen  and  per- 
mitted; and  are  thus  taken  up,  not  as  the  acts  of  God,  but  as  the 
acts  of  men,  into  the  Divine  government.  "  Ye  devised  evil  against 
me,"  says  Joseph  to  his  brethren,  "  but  God  meant  it  for  good." 
Thus  the  principle  which  vitiates  Dr.  Hill's  statement  is  detected. 
Grotius  has  much  better  observed,  "  When  we  say  that  God  is  the 
cause  of  all  things,  we  mean  of  all  such  things  as  have  a  real  exist- 
ence ;  which  is  no  reason  why  those  things  themselves  should  not 
be  the  cause  of  some  accidents,  such  as  actions  are.  God  created 
men,  and  some  other  intelligences  superior  to  man,  with  a  liberty 
of  acting ;  which  liberty  of  acting  is  not  in  itself  evil,  but  may  be 
the  cause  of  something  that  is  evil ;  and  to  make  God  the  author 
of  evils  of  this  kind,  which  are  called  moral  evils,  is  the  highest 
wickedness.  (7) 

Perhaps  the  notions  which  Calvinists  form  as  to  the  will  may  be 
regarded  as  a  consequence  of  the  predestinarian  branch  of  their 
system  ;  but  whether  they  are  among  the  metaphysical  sources  of 
their  error,  or  consequents  upon  it,  they  may  here  have  a  brief  notice. 

If  the  doctrine  just  refuted  were  allowed,  namely,  that  all  events 
are  produced  by  the  determination  of  the  Divine  will ;  and  that  the 
end  and  means  are  bound  up  in  "  one  decree  ;"  the  predestinarian 
had  sagacity  enough  to  discern  that  the  volitions,  as  well  as  the  acts 
of  men,  must  be  placed  equally  under  bondage,  to  make  the  scheme 
consistent ;  and,  that  whenever  any  moral  action  is  the  end  proposed, 
the  choice  of  the  will,  as  the  means  to  that  end,  must  come  under 
the  same  appointment  and  determination.  It  is,  indeed,  not  denied, 
that  creatures  may  lose  the  power  to  will  that  which  is  morally 
good.  Such  is  the  state  of  devils  ;  and  such  would  have  been  the 
state  of  man,  had  he  been  left  wholly  to  the  consequences  of  the 
fall.  The  inability  is,  however,  not  a  natural,  but  a  moral  one  ;  for 
volition,  as  a  power  of  the  mind,  is  not  destroyed,  but  brought  so 
completely  under  the  dominion  of  a  corrupt  nature,  as  not  to  be 
morally  capable  of  choosing  any  thing  but  evil.  If  man  is  not  in 
>  this  condition,  it  is  owing,  not  to  the  remains  of  original  goodness, 
as  some  suppose,  but  to  that  "  grace  of  God"  which  is  the  result  of 
the  "  free  gift"  bestowed  upon  all  men  ;  but  that  the  power  to 
(7)  Truth  of  the  Christian  Religion,  s.  8. 


lt>S  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [FaRT 

choose  that  which  is  good,  in  some  respects,  and  as  a  first  step  to 
the  entire  and  exclusive  choice  of  good  in  the  highest  decree,  is  in 
man's  possession,  must  be  certainly  concluded  from  the  calls  so 
often  made  upon  him  in  the  word  of  God  to  change  his  conduct, 
and,  in  order  to  this,,  his  will.     "  Hear,  ye  deaf,  and  see,  ye  blind,'* 
is  the  exhortation  of  a  prophet,  which,  whilst  it  charges  both  spiritual 
deafness  and  blindness  upon  the  Jews,  supposes  a  power  existing 
in  them,  both  of  opening  the  eyes,  and  unstopping  the  ears.     Such 
are  all  the  exhortations  to  repentance  and  faith  addressed  to  sinners, 
and  the  threatenings  consequent  upon  continued  impenitence  and 
unbelief;  which  equally  suppose  a  power  of  considering,  willing, 
and  acting,  in  all  things  adequate  to  the  commencement  of  a  reli- 
gious course.     From  whatever  source  it  may  be  derived,  and  no 
other  can  be  assigned  to  it  consistently  with  the  Scriptures  than  the 
grace  of  God,  this  power  must  be  experienced  to  the  full  extent  of 
the  call  and  the  obligation  to  these  duties.     A  power  of  choosing 
only  to  do  evil,  and  of  remaining  impenitent,  cannot  be  reconciled 
to  such  exhortations.     This  would  but  be  a  mockery  of  men,  and 
a  mere  show  of  equitable  government  on  the  part  of  God,  without 
any  thing  correspondent  to  this  appearance  of  equity  in  point  of 
fact.    The  Calvinistic  doctrine,  however,  takes  another  course.  As 
the  sin  and  the  destruction  of  the  reprobate  is  determined  by  the 
decree,  and  their  will  is  either  left  to  its  natural  proneness  to  the 
choice  of  evil,  or  is,  by  coaction,  impelled  to  it ;  so  the  salvation  of 
the  elect  being  absolutely  decreed,  the  will,  at  the  appointed  time, 
comes  under  an  irresistible  impulse  which  carries  it  to  the  choice 
of  good.     Nor  is  this  only  an  occasional  influence,  leaving  men 
afterwards,  or  by  intervals,  to  freedom  of  choice,  which  might  be 
allowed  ;  but,  in  all  cases,  and  at  all  times,  the  will,  when  directed 
to  good,  moves  only  under  the  unfrustrable  impulses  of  grace.  That 
man,  therefore,  has  no  choice,  or  at  least  no  alternative  in  either 
case,  is  the  doctrine  assumed ;  and  no  other  view  can  be  consistently 
taken  by  those  who  admit  the  scheme  of  absolute  predestination. 
To  one  class  of  objects  is  the  will  determined  ;  no  other  being,  in 
either  case,  possible  :  and  thus  one  course  of  action,  fulfilling  the 
decree  of  God,  is  the  only  possible  result,  or  the  decree  would  not 
be  absolute,  and  fixed. 

Some  Calvinists  have  adopted  all  the  consequences  which  follow 
this  view  of  the  subject.  They  ascribe  the  actions  and  volitions  o9 
man  to  God,  and  regard  sinful  men  as  impelled  to  a  necessity  of 
sinning,  in  order  to  the  infliction  of  that  punishment  which  they 
think  will  glorify  the  sovereign  wrath  of  him  who  made  "  the 
wicked"  intentionally  "  for  the  day  of  evil."    Enough  has  been  said 


SECOND.}  THEOLOGICAL  INSTlTLi  L>-  fUH 

in  refutation  of  this  gross  and  blasphemous  opinion,  which,  though 
it  inevitably  follows  from  absolute  predestination,  the  more  modest 
writers  of  the  same  school  have  endeavoured  to  hide  under  various 
guises,  or  to  reconcile  to  some  show  of  justice  by  various  subtleties. 

It  has,  for  instance,  been  contended,  that  as  in  the  case  of  trans- 
gressors, the  evil  acts  done  by  them  are  the  choice  of  their  corrupt 
will,  they  are,  therefore,  done  willingly ;  and  that  they  are  in  con- 
sequence punishable,  although  their  will  could  not  but  choose  them. 
This  may  be  allowed  to  be  true  in  the  case  of  devils,  supposing 
them  at  first  to  have  voluntarily  corrupted  an  innocent  nature 
endowed  with  the  power  of  maintaining  its  hmoeence,  and  that 
they  were  under  no  absolute  decree  determining  them  to  this 
offence.  For,  though  now  their  will  is  so  much  under  the  control 
of  their  bad  passions,  and  is  in  itself  so  vicious,  that  it  has  no  dis- 
position at  all  to  good,  and  from  their  nature,  remaining  in  its  pre- 
sent state,  can  have  no  such  tendency  ;  yet  the  original  act,  or  series 
of  acts,  by  which  this  state  of  their  will  and  affections  was  induced, 
being  their  own,  and  the  result  of  a  deliberate  choice  between  moral 
good  and  evil,  both  being  in  their  own  power,  they  are  justly  held 
to  be  culpable  for  all  that  follows,  having  had,  originally,  the  power 
to  avoid  both  the  first  sin  and  all  others  consequent  upon  it.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  sinful  men,  who  have  formed  in  themselves, 
by  repeated  acts  of  evil,  at  first  easily  avoided,  various  habits  to 
which  the  will  opposes  a  decreasing  resistance  in  proportion  as  they 
acquire  strength.  Such  persons,  too,  as  are  spoken  of  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  those  whom  "  it  is  impossible  to  renew  unto 
repentance,"  may  be  regarded  as  approaching  very  nearly  to  the 
state  of  apostate  spirits,  and  being  left  without  any  of  the  aids  oi" 
that  Holy  Spirit  whom  they  have  "  quenched,"  cannot  be  supposed 
capable  of  willing  good.  Yet  are  they  themselves  justly  chargeable 
with  this  state  of  their  wills,  and  all  the  evils  resulting  from  it.  But 
the  case  of  devils  is  widely  different  to  that  of  men  who,  by  their 
hereditary  corruption,  and  the  fall  of  human  nature,  to  which  they 
were  not  consenting  parties,  come  into  the  world  with  this  infirm, 
and,  indeed,  perverse  state  of  the  will,  as  to  all  good.  It  is  not  their 
personal  fault  that  they  are  born  with  a  will  averse  from  good  ;  and 
it  cannot  be  their  personal  fault  that  they  continue  thus  inclined 
only  to  evil  if  no  assistance  has  been  afforded,  no  gracious  influence 
imparted,  to  counteract  this  fault  of  nature,  and  to  set  the  will  so 
far  free,  that  it  can  choose  either  the  good  urged  upon  it  by  the 
authority  and  exciting  motives  of  the  Gospel,  or,  "  making  light"  of 
that,  to  yield  itself,  in  opposition  to  conviction,  to  the  evil  to  which 
it  is  by  nature  prone.     It  is  not  denied,  that  the  will,  in  its  purely 

Vol.  III.  %% 


170  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTE^.  [FA*'J 

natural  state,  and  independent  of  all  grace  communicated  to  man 
through  Christ,  can  incline  only  to  evil ;  but  the  question  is,  whether 
it  is  so  left ;  and  whether,  if  this  be  contended  for,  the  circumstance 
of  a  sinful  act  being  the  act  of  a  will  not  able  to  determine  other- 
wise, from  whatever  cause  that  may  arise,  whether  from  the  in- 
fluence of  circumstances  or  from  coaction,  or  from  its  own  invincible 
depravity,  renders  him  punishable  who  never  had  the  means  of 
preventing  his  will  from  lapsing  into  this  diseased  and  vitiated  state ; 
who  was  born  with  this  moral  disease ;  and  who,  by  an  absolute 
decree,  has  been  excluded  from  all  share  in  the  remedy  1  This  is 
the  only  simplp  and  correct  way  of  viewing  the  subject ;  and  it  is 
quite  independent  of  all  metaphysical  hypotheses  as  to  the  will. 
The  argument  is,  that  an  aet  which  has  the  consent  of  the  will  is 
punishable,  although  the  will  can  only  choose  evil :  we  reply,  that 
this  is  only  true  where  the  time  of  trial  is  past,  as  in  devils  and 
apostates ;  and  then  only,  because  these  are  personally  guilty  of 
having  so  vitiated  their  wills  as  to  render  them  incapable  of  good. 
But  the  case  of  men  who  have  fallen  by  the  fault  of  another,  and 
who  are  still  in  a  state  of  trial,  is  one  totally  different.  The  sen- 
tence is  passed  upon  devils,  and  it  is  as  good  as  past  upon  such 
apostates  as  the  apostle  describes  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ; 
but  the  mass  of  mankind  are  still  probationers,  and  are  appointed  to 
be  judged  according  to  their  works,  whether  good  or  evil.  We 
deny,  then,  first,  that  they  are,  in  any  case,  left  without  the  power 
of  willing  good ;  and  we  deny  it  on  the  authority  of  Scripture.  For, 
in  no  sense,  can  "  life  and  death  be  set  before  us,"  in  order  that  we 
may  "  choose  life,"  if  man  is  wholly  derelict  by  the  grace  of  God, 
and  if  he  remains  under  his  natural,  and,  but  for  the  grace  of  God 
given  to  all  mankind,  his  invincible  inclination  to  evil.  For  if  this 
be  the  natural  state  of  mankind,  and  if  to  a  part  of  them  that 
remedial  grace  is  denied,  then  is  not  "  life"  set  before  them  as  an 
object  of  "  choice  ;"  and  if  to  another  part  that  grace  is  so  given, 
that  it  irresistibly  and  constantly  works  so  as  to  compel  the  will  to 
choose  predetermined  and  absolutely  appointed  acts,  no  "  death"  is 
set  before  them  as  an  object  of  choice.  If,  therefore,  according  to 
the  Scriptures,  both  life  and  death  are  set  before  men,  then  have 
they  power  to  choose  or  refuse  either,  which  is  conclusive,  on  the 
one  hand,  against  the  doctrine  of  the  total  dereliction  of  the  repro- 
bate, and  on  the  other  against  the  unfrustrable  operation  of  grace 
upon  the  elect.  So,  also,  when  our  Lord  says,  "  I  would  have 
gathered  you  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and 
ye  would  not,"  the  notion  that  men  who  finally  perish  have  no 
power  of  willing  that  which  is  good,  is  totally  disproved.     The 


SJJOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES'.  171 

blame  is  manifestly,  and  beyond  all  the  arts  of  cavilling  criticism, 
laid  upon  their  not  willing  in  a  contrary  manner,  which  would 
be  false  upon  the  Calvinistic  hypothesis.  "  I  would  not,  and  ye 
could  not,"  ought,  in  that  case,  to  have  been  the  reading  ;  since 
they  are  bound  to  one  determination  only,  either  by  the  external 
or  internal  influence  of  another,  or  by  a  natural  and  involuntary 
disease  of  the  will,  for  which  no  remedy  was  ever  provided. 

Thus  it  is  decided  by  the  word  of  God  itself,  that  men  who  perish 
might  have  "  chosen  life."  It  is  confirmed,  also,  by  natural  reason ; 
for  it  is  most  egregiously  to  trifle  with  the  common  sense  of  man- 
kind to  call  that  a  righteous  procedure  in  God  whieh  would  by  ajl 
men  be  condemned  as  a  monstrous  act  of  tyranny  and  oppression 
in  a  human  judge,  namely,  to  punish  capitally,  as  for  a  personal 
offence,  those  who  never  could  will  or  act  otherwise,  being  impelled 
by  an  invincible  and  incurable  natural  impulse  over  which  they 
never  had  any  control.  Nor  is  the  case  at  all  amended  by  the 
quibble  that  they  act  willingly,  that  is,  with  consent  of  the  will ;  for 
since  the  will  is  under  a  natural  and  irresistible  power  to  incline 
only  one  way,  obedience  is  full  as  much  out  of  their  power  by  this 
slate  of  the  will,  which  they  did  not  bring  upon  themselves,  as  if 
they  were  restrained  from  all  obedience  to  the  law  of  God  by  an 
external  and  irresistible  impulse  always  acting  upon  them. 

The  case  thus  kept  upon  the  basis  of  plain  Scripture,  and  the 
natural  reason  of  mankind,  stands,  as  we  have  said,  clear  of  all 
metaphysical  subtleties,  and  cannot  be  subjected  to  their  determi- 
nation ;  but  as  attempts  have  been  made  to  establish  the  doctrine 
of  necessity,  from  the  actual  phenomena  of  the  human  will,  we  may 
glance,  also,  at.  this  philosophic  attempt  to  give  plausibility  to  the 
predestinarian  hypothesis. 

The  philosophic  doctrine  is,  that  the  will  is  swayed  by  motives } 
that  motives  arise  from  circumstances ;  that  circumstances  are 
ordered  by  a  power  above  us,  and  beyond  our  control ;  and  that, 
therefore,  our  volitions  necessarily  follow  an  order  and  chain  of 
events  appointed  and  decreed  by  infinite  wisdom.  President  Ed- 
wards, in  his  well  known  work  on  the  will,  applied  this  philosophy 
in  aid  of  Calvinism  ;  and  has  been  largely  followed  by  the  divines 
of  that  school.  But  who  does  not  see  that  this  attempt  to  find  a 
refuge  in  the  doctrine  of  philosophical  necessity  affords  no  shelter 
to  the  Calvinian  system,  when  pressed  either  by  Scripture  or  by 
arguments  founded  upon  the  acknowledged  principles  of  justice  1 
For  what  matters  it,  whether  the  will  is  obliged  to  one  class  of 
volitions  by  the  immediate  influence  of  God,  or  by  the  denial  of  his 
remedial  influence,  the  doctrme  of  the  elder  Calvinists ;  or  thtit  i/. 


173  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  ^PAlU 

is  obliged  to  a  certain  class  of  volitions  by  motives  which  are  irre- 
sistible in  their  operation,  which  result  from  an  arrangement  of 
circumstances  ordered  by  God,  and  which  we  cannot  control^ 
Take  which  theory  you  please  you  are  involved  in  the  same  diffi- 
culties ;  for  the  result  is,  that  men  can  neither  will  nor  act  other- 
wise than  they  do,  being,  in  one  case,  inevitably  disabled  by  an  act 
of  God,  and  in  the  other  bound  by  a  chain  of  events  established  by 
an  Almighty  power.  The  advocates  for  this  philosophic  theory  of 
the  will  must  be  content  to  take  this  conclusion,  therefore,  and 
reconcile  it  as  they  can  with  the  Scriptures ;  but  they  have  the  same 
task  as  their  elder  brethren  of  the  same  faith,  and  have  made  it  no 
easier  by  their  philosophy. 

It  is  in  vain,  too,  that  they  refer  us  to  our  own  consciousness  in 
proof  of  this  theory.  Nothing  is  more  directly  contradicted  by  what 
passes  in  every  man's  mind ;  and  if  we  may  take  the  terms  human 
language  has  used  on  these  subjects,  as  an  indication  of  the  general 
feelings  of  mankind  it  is  contradicted  by  the  experience  of  all  ages 
and  countries.  For  if  the  will  is  thus  absolutely  dependant  upon 
motives,  and  motives  arise  out  of  uncontrollable  circumstances,  for 
men  to  praise  or  to  blame  each  other  is  a  manifest  absurdity ;  and  , 
yet  all  languages  abound  in  such  terms.  So,  also,  there  can  be  no 
such  thing  as  conscience,  which,  upon  this  scheme,  is  a  popular 
delusion  which  a  better  philosophy  might  have  dispelled.  For  why 
do  I  blame  or  commend  myself  in  my  inward  thoughts,  any  more 
than  I  censure  or  praise  others,  if  I  am,  as  to  my  choice,  but  the 
passive  creature  of  motives  and  predetermined  circumstances  ? 

But  the  sophistry  is  easily  detected.  The  notion  inculcated  is, 
that  motives  influence  the  will  just  as  an  additional  weight  thrown 
into  an  even  scale  poises  it  and  inclines  the  beam.  This  is  the 
favourite  metaphor  of  the  necessitarians ;  yet,  to  make  the  com- 
parison good,  they  ought  to  have  first  proved  the  will  to  be  as 
passive  as  the  balance,  or,  in  other  words,  they  should  have  annihi- 
lated the  distinction  between  mind  and  matter.  But  this  necessary 
connexion  between  motive  and  volition  may  be  denied.  For  what 
are  motives,  as  rightly  understood  here  1  Not  physical  causes,  as  a 
weight  thrown  into  a  scale ;  but  reasons  of  choice,  views  and  con- 
ceptions of  things  in  the  mind,  which,  themselves,  do  not  work  the 
will,  as  a  machine ;  but  in  consideration  of  which,  the  mind  itself 
wills  and  determines.  But  if  the  mind  itself  were  obliged  to  deter- 
mine by  the  strongest  motive,  as  the  beam  is  to  incline  by  the 
heaviest  weight,  it  would  be  obliged  to  determine  always  by  the 
best  reason  ;  for  motive  being  but  a  reason  of  action  considered  in 
■the  mind,  then  the  best  reason,  being  in  the  nature  of  things  the 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  173 

strongest,  must  always  predominate.  But  this  is,  plainly,  contrary 
to  fact  and  experience.  If  it  were  not,  all  men  would  act  reasonably, 
and  none  foolishly ;  or,  at  least,  there  would  be  no  faults  among 
them  but  those  of  the  understanding,  none  of  the  heart  and  affections. 
The  weakest  reason,  however,  too  generally  succeeds  when  appetite 
and  corrupt  affection  are  present ;  that  is  to  say,  the  weakest  motive. 
For  if  this  be  not  allowed,  we  must  say,  that  under  the  influence  of 
appetite  the  weakest  reason  always  appears  the  strongest,  which  is 
also  false,  in  fact;  for  then  there  would  be  no  sins  committed 
against  judgment  and  conviction,  and  that  many  of  our  sins  are  of 
this  description,  our  consciences  painfully  convict  us.  That  the  mind 
wills  and  acts  generally  under  the  influence  of  motives,  may,  there- 
fore, be  granted  ;  but  that  it  is  passive,  and  operated  upon  by  them 
necessarily,  is  disproved  by  the  fact  of  our  often  acting  under  the 
weakest  reason  or  motive,  which  is  the  character  of  all  sins  against 
our  judgment. 

But  were  we  even  to  admit  that  present  reasons  or  motives 
operate  irresistibly  upon  the  will,  the  necessary  connexion  between 
motive  and  volition  would  not  be  established ;  unless  it  could  be 
proved  that  we  have  no  power  to  displace  one  motive  by  another, 
nor  to  control  those  circumstances  from  which  motives  flow.  Yet, 
who  will  say  that  a  person  may  not  shun  evil  company  and  fly  from 
many  temptations  1  Either  this  must  be  allowed,  or  else  it  must  be 
a  link  in  the  necessary  chain  of  events  fixed  by  a  superior  power, 
that  we  should  seek  and  not  fly  evil  company ;  and  so  the  exhorta-. 
tions,  "when  sinners  entice  thee  consent  thou  not,"  and  "go  not 
into  the  way  of  sinners,"  are  very  impertinent,  and  only  prove  that 
Solomon  was  no  philosopher.  But  we  are  all  conscious  that  we 
have  the  power  to  alter,  and  control,  and  avoid,  the  force  of  mo- 
tives. If  not,  why  does  a  man  resist  the  same  temptation  at  one  time 
and  yield  to  it  at  another,  without  any  visible  change  of  the  circum- 
stances ]  He  can  also  both  change  his  circumstances  by  shunning 
evil  company ;  and  fly  the  occasions  of  temptation ;  and  control 
that  motive  at  one  time  to  which  he  yields  at  another,  under  similar 
circumstances.  Nay,  he  sometimes  resists  a  powerful  temptation,, 
which  is  the  same  thing  as  resisting  a  powerful  motive,  and  yields 
at  another  to  a  feeble  one,  and  is  conscious  that  he  does  so :  a 
sufficient  proof  that  there  is  an  irregularity  and  corruptness  in  the 
self-determining  active  power  of  the  mind,  independent  of  motive. 
Still,  farther,  the  motive  or  reason  for  an  action  may  be  a  bad  one, 
and  yet  be  prevalent  for  want  of  the  presence  of  a  better  reason 
or  motive  to  lead  to  a  contrary  choice  and  act ;  but,  in  how  many 
instances  is  this  the  true  cause  why  a  better  reason  or  stronger 


174  .THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

motive  is  not  present,  that  we  have  lived  thoughtless  and  vain  lives, 
little  considering  the  good  or  evil  of  things'?  And  if  so,  then  the 
thoughtless  might  have  been  more  thoughtful,  and  the  ignorant 
might  have  acquired  better  knowledge,  and  thereby  have  placed 
themselves  under  the  influence  of  stronger  and  better  motives.  Thus 
this  theory  does  not  accord  with  the  facts  of  our  own  consciousness, 
but  contradicts  them.  It  is,  also,  refuted  by  every  part  of  the  moral 
history  of  man ;  and  it  may  be,  therefore,  concluded  that  those 
speculations  on  the  human  will,  to  which  the  predestinarian  theory 
has  driven  its  advocates,  are  equally  opposed  to  the  words  of 
Scripture,  to  the  philosophy  of  mind,  to  our  observation  of  what 
passes  in  others,  and  to  our  own  convictions. 

Our  moral  liberty  manifestly  consists  in  the  united  power  of 
thinking  and  reasoning,  and  of  choosing  and  acting  upon  such 
thinking  and  reasoning  ;  so  that  the  clearer  our  thought  and  con- 
ception is  of  what  is  fit  and  right,  and  the  more  constantly  our  choice 
is  determined  by  it,  the  more  nearly  we  rise  to  the  highest  acts  and 
exercises  of  this  liberty.  The  best  beings  have,  therefore,  the  highest 
degree  of  moral  liberty,  since  no  motive  to  will  or  act  wrong  is  any 
thing  else  but  a  violation  of  this  established  and  original  connexion 
between  right  reason,  choice,  and  conduct ;  and  if  any  necessity 
bind  the  irrational  motive  upon  the  will,  it  is  either  the  result  of  bad 
voluntary  habit,  for  which  we  are  accountable ;  or  necessity  of 
nature  and  circumstances,  for  which  we  are  not  accountable.  In 
the  former  case  the  actually  influencing  motive  is  evitable,  and  the 
theory  of  the  necessitarians  is  disproved :  in  the  latter  it  is  confirmed ; 
but  then  man  is  neither  responsible  to  his  fellow  man  nor  to  God. 

Certain  notions  as  to  the  Divine  Sovereignty  have  also  been 
resorted  to  by  Calvinists,  in  order  to  render  that  scheme  plausible 
which  cuts  off  the  greater  part  of  the  human  race  from  the  hope  of 
salvation,  by  the  absolute  decree  of  God. 

That  the  sovereignty  of  God  is  a  scriptural  doctrine  no  one  can 
deny ;  but  it  does  not  follow,  that  the  notions  which  men  please  to 
form  of  it  should  be  received  as  scriptural ;  for  religious  errors 
consist  not  only  in  denying  the  doctrines  of  the  word  of  God,  but 
also  in  interpreting  them  fallaciously. 

The  Calvinistic  view  of  God's  sovereignty  appears  to  be,  his  doing 
what  he  wills,  only  because  he  wills  it.  So  Calvin  himself  has  stated 
the  case,  as  we  have  noticed  above  ;  but  as  this  view  is  repugnant 
to  all  worthy  notions  of  an  infinitely  wise  Being,  so  it  has  no  coun- 
tenance in  Scripture.  The  doctrine  which  we  are  there  taught  is^ 
that  God's  sovereignty  consists  in  his  doing  many  things  by  virtue 
of  his  own  supreme  right  and  dominion,  but  that  this  right  is  under 


SECOND.]  1HE0L0G1CAL  INSTITUTES.  H6 

the  direction  of  his  "  counsel"  or  "  wisdom."  The  brightest  act  of 
sovereignty  is  that  of  creation,  and  one  in  which,  if  in  any,  mere 
"will  might  seem  to  have  the  chief  place  ;  yet,  even  in  this  act,  by 
which  myriads  of  beings  of  diverse  powers  and  capacities  were 
produced,  "  we  are  taught  that  all  was  done  in  wisdom."  Nor  can 
it  be  said  that  the  sovereignty  of  God  in  creation,  is  uncontrolled 
by  either  justice  or  goodness.  If  the  final  cause  of  creation  had 
been  the  misery  of  all  sentient  creatures,  and  all  its  contrivances 
had  tended  to  that  end :  if,  for  instance,  every  sight  had  been  dis- 
gusting, every  smell  a  stench,  every  sound  a  scream,  and  every 
necessary  function  of  life  had  been  performed  with  pain,  we  must 
necessarily  have  referred  the  creation  of  such  a  world  to  a  malignant 
being ;  and,  if  we  are  obliged  to  think  it  impossible  that  a  good 
being  could  have  employed  his  almighty  power  with  the  direct  inten- 
tion to  inflict  misery,  we  then  concede  that  his  acts  of  sovereignty 
are,  by  the  very  perfection  of  his  nature,  under  the  direction  of  his 
goodness,  as  to  all  creatures  potentially  existing,  or  actually  existing 
whilst  still  innocent.  Nor  can  we  think  it  borne  out  by  Scripture, 
or  by  the  reasonable  notions  of  mankind,  that  the  exercise  of  God's 
sovereignty  in  the  creation  of  things  is  exempt  from  any  respect 
to  justice,  a  quality  of  the  Divine  nature,  which  is  nothing  but  his 
essential  rectitude  in  exercise. »  It  is  true,  that  as  existence,  under 
all  circumstances  in  which  to  exist  is  better  upon  the  whole  than 
not  to  exist,  leaves  the  creature  no  claim  to  have  been  otherwise 
than  it  is  made  ;  and  that  God  has  a  sovereign  right  to  make  one 
being  an  archangel  and  another  an  insect,  so  that  "the  thing 
formed"  may  not  say  "  to  him  that  formed  it,  why  hast  thou  made 
me  thus  1"  It  could  deserve  nothing  before  creation,  its  being  not 
having  commenced  ;  all  that  it  is,  and  has,  (its  existent  state  being 
better  than  non-existence,)  is,  therefore,  a  boon  conferred;  and, 
in  matters  of  grace,  no  axiom  can  be  more  clear,  than  that  he  who 
gratuitously  bestows  has  the  right  "  to  do  what  he  will  with  his  own." 
But  every  creature  having  been  formed  without  any  consent  of  its 
own,  if  it  be  innocent  of  offence,  either  from  the  rectitude  of  its 
nature,  or  from  a  natural  incapacity  of  offending,  as  not  being  a 
moral  agent,  appears  to  have  a  claim,  in  natural  right,  upon  ex- 
emption from  such  pains  and  sufferings,  as  would  render  existence 
a  worse  condition  than  never  to  have  been  called  out  of  nothing. 
For,  as  a  benevolent  being,  which  God  is  acknowledged  to  be, 
cannot  make  a  creature  with  such  an  intention  and  contrivance, 
that,  by  its  very  constitution,  it  must  necessarily  be  wholly  misera- 
ble; and  we  see  in  this,  that  his  sovereignty  is  regulated  by  his 
gpodness  as  to  the  commencement  of  the  existence  of  sentient 


nt»  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PAET 

creatures ;  so,  from  the  moment  they  begin  to  be,  the  government 
of  God  over  them  commences,  and  sovereignty  in  government  neces- 
sarily grounds  itself  upon  the  principles  of  equity  and  justice,  and 
"  the  Judge  of  the  whole  earth"  must  and  will  "  do  right." 

This  is  the  manifest  doctrine  of  Scripture,  for,  although  Almighty 
God  often  gives  "  no  account  of  his  matters,"  nor,  in  some  instances, 
admits  us  to  know  how  he  is  both  just  and  gracious  in  his  adminis- 
tration, yet  are  we  referred  constantly  to  those  general  declarations 
of  his  own  word,  which  assure  us  that  he  is  so,  that  we  may  "  walk 
by  faith,"  and  wait  for  that  period,  when,  after  the  faith  and  patience 
of  good  men  have  been  sufficiently  tried,  the  manifestation  of  these 
facts  shall  take  place  to  our  comfort  and  to  his  glory.  In  many 
respects,  so  far  as  we  are  concerned,  we  see  no  other  reason  for 
his  proceedings,  than  that  he  so  wills  to  act.  But  the  error  into 
which  our  brethcen  often  fall,  is  to  conclude,  from  their  want  of 
information  in  such  cases,  that  God  acts  merely  because  he  wills 
so  to  act ;  that  because  he  gives  not  those  reasons  for  his  conduct 
which  we  have  no  right  to  demand,  that  he  acts  without  any  reasons 
at  all ;  and  because  we  are  not  admitted  to  the  secrets  of  his  council 
chamber,  that  his  government  is  perfectly  arbitrary,  and  that  the 
main  spring  of  his  leading  dispensations  is  to  make  a  show  of  power : 
a  conclusion  which  implies  a  most  unworthy  notion  of  God,  which 
he  has  himself  contradicted  in  the  most  explicit  mariner.  Even  his 
most  mysterious  proceedings  are  called  "judgments;"  and  he  is 
said  to  work  all  things  "  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  own  willy  * 
a  collation  of  words,  which  sufficiently  show  that  not  blind  will, 
but  will  subject  to  "counsel"  is  that  sovereign  will  which  governs 
the  world. 

"  Whenever,  therefore,  God  acts  as  a  governor,  as  a  re  warder, 
,  or  punisher,  he  no  longer  acts  as  a  mere  sovereign,  by  his  own  sole 
will  and  pleasure,  but  as  an  impartial  judge,  guided  in  all  things  by 
invariable  justice. 

"  Yet  it  is  true,  that,  in  some  cases,  mercy  rejoices  over  justice, 
although  severity  never  does.  God  may  reward  more,  but  he  will 
never  punish  more  than  strict  justice  requires.  It  may  be  allowed, 
that  God  acts  as  sovereign  in  convincing  some  souls  of  sin,  arresting 
them  in  their  mad  career  by  his  resistless  power.  It  seems  also, 
that,  at  the  moment  of  our  conversion,  he  acts  irresistibly.  There 
may  likewise  be  many  irresistible  touches  in  the  course  of  our 
Christian  warfare ;  but  still,  as  St.  Paul  might  have  been  either 
obedient  or  '  disobedient  to  the  heavenly  vision,'  so  every  individual 
may,  after  all  that  God  has  done,  either  improve  his  grace,  or  make 
it  of  none  effect. 


SECOND.}  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  Wt 

"Whatever,  therefore,  it  has  pleased  God  to  do,  of  his  sovereign 
pleasure,  as  Creator  of  heaven  and  earth  ;  and  whatever  his  mercy 
may  do  on  particidar  occasions,  over  and  above  what  justice 
requires,  the  general  rule  stands  firm  as  the  pillars  of  heaven.  '  The 
Judge  of  all  the  earth  will  do  right :'  '  he  will  judge  the  world  ill 
righteousness,'  and  every  man  therein,  according  to  the  strictest 
justice.  He  will  punish  no  man  for  doing  any  thing  which  he  could 
not  possibly  avoid  ;  neither  for  omitting  any  thing  which  he  could 
not  possibly  do.  Every  punishment  supposes  the  offender  might 
have  avoided  the  offence  for  which  he  is  punished,  otherwise  to 
punish  him  would  be  palpably  unjust,  and  inconsistent  with  the 
character  of  God  our  governor."  (8) 

The  case  of  heathen  nations  has  sometimes  been  referred  to 
by  Calvinists,  as  presenting  equal  difficulties  to  those  urged  against 
their  scheme  of  election  and  reprobation.  But  the  cases  are  not  at 
all  parallel,  nor  can  they  be  made  so,  unless  it  could  be  proved  that 
heathens,  as  such,  are  inevitably  excluded  from  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  ;  which  is  not,  as  some  of  them  seem  to  suppose,  a  conceded 
point.  Those,  indeed,  if  there  be  any  such,  who,  believing  in  the 
universal  redemption  of  mankind,  should  allow  this,  woidd  be  most 
inconsistent  with  themselves,  and  give  up  many  of  those  principles 
on  which  they  successfully  contend  against  the  doctrine  of  absolute 
reprobation ;  but  the  argument  lies  in  small  compass,  and  is  to  be 
determined  by  the  word  of  God,  and  not  by  the  speculations  of  men. 
The  actual  state  of  pagan  nations  is  affectingly  bad ;  but  nothing 
can  be  deduced  from  what  they  are  in  fact  against  their  salvability ; 
for  although  there  is  no  ground  to  hope  for  the  salvation  of  great 
numbers  of  them,  actual  salvation  is  one  thing,  and  possible  salva- 
tion is  another.  Nor  does  it  affect  this  question,  if  we  see  not  how 
heathens  may  be  saved ;  that  is,  by  what  means  repentance,  and 
faith,  and  righteousness,  should  be  in  any  such  degree  wrought  in 
them,  as  that  they  shall  become  acceptable  to  God.  The  dispen- 
sation of  religion  under  which  all  those  nations  are  to  whom  the 
Gospel  has  never  been  sent,  continues  to  be  the  patriarchal  dispen-  , 
sation.  That  men  were  saved  under  that  in  former  times  we  know, 
and  at  what  point,  if  any,  a  religion  becomes  so  far  corrupted,  and 
truth  so  far  extinct,  as  to  leave  no  means  of  salvation  to  men,  nothing 
to  call  forth  a  true  faith  in  principle,  and  obedience  to  what  remains 
known  or  knowable  of  the  original  law,  no  one  has  the  right  to 
determine,  unless  he  can  adduce  some  authority  from  Scripture. 
That  authority  is  certainly  not  available  to  the  conclusion,  that,  in 
point  of  fact,  the  means  of  salvation  are  utterly  withdrawn  from 

f8>  WesleVs  Works,  vol.  15.  p.  2? 

vQh,  in, 


178  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

heathens.  We  may  say  that  a  murderous,  adulterous,  and  idola- 
trous heathen  will  be  shut  out  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  we 
must  say  this,  on  the  express  exclusion  of  all  such  characters  from 
future  blessedness  by  the  word  of  God ;  but  it  would  be  little  to  the 
purpose  to  say,  that,  as  far  as  we  know,  all  of  them  are  wicked  and 
idolatrous.  As  far  as  we  know  they  may,  but  we  do  not  know  the 
whole  case  ;  and,  were  these  charges  universally  true,  yet  the  ques- 
tion is  not  what  the  heathen  are,  but  what  they  have  the  means  of 
becoming.  We  indeed  know  that  all  are  not  equally  vicious,  nay, 
that  some  virtuous  heathens  have  been  found  in  all  ages  ;  and  some 
earnest  and  anxious  inquirers  after  truth,  dissatisfied  with  the  notions 
prevalent  in  their  own  countries  respectively  ;  and  what  these  few 
were,  the  rest  might  have  been  likewise.  But,  if  we  knew  no  such 
instances  of  superior  virtue  and  eager  desire  of  religious  information 
among  them,  the  true  question,  "  what  degree  of  truth  is,  after  all, 
attainable  by  them  ?"  would  still  remain  a  question  which  must  be 
determined  not  so  much  by  our  knowledge  of  facts  which  may  be 
very  obscure  ;  but  such  principles  and  general  declarations  as  we 
find  applicable  to  the  case  in  the  word  of  God. 

If  all  knowledge  of  right  and  wrong,  and  all  gracious  influence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  all  objects  of  faith  have  passed  away  from 
the  heathen,  through  the  fault  of  their  ancestors  "  not  liking  to 
retain  God  in  their  knowledge,"  and  without  the  present  race  having 
been  parties  to  this  wilful  abandonment  of  truth,  then  they  would 
appear  no  longer  to  be  accountable  creatures,  being  neither  under 
law  nor  under  grace ;  but  as  we  find  it  a  doctrine  of  Scripture  that 
all  men  are  responsible  to  God,  and  that  the  "  whole  world"  will 
be  judged  at  the  last  day,  we  are  bound  to  admit  the  accountability 
of  all,  and  with  that,  the  remains  of  law  and  the  existence  of  a 
merciful  government  towards  the  heathen  on  the  part  of  God. 
With  this  the  doctrine  of  St.  Paul  accords.  No  one  can  take  stronger 
views  of  the  actual  danger  and  the  corrupt  state  of  the  Gentiles 
than  he  ;  yet  he  affirms  that  the  Divine  law  had  not  perished  wholly 
from  among  them  ;  that  though  they  had  received  no  revealed  law, 
yet  they  had  a  law  "  written  on  their  hearts ;"  meaning,  no  doubt, 
the  traditionary  law,  the  equity  of  which  their  consciences  attested ; 
and,  farther,  that  though  they  had  not  the  written  law,  yet,  that 
"  by  nature,"  that  is,  "  without  an  outward  rule,  though  this,  also, 
strictly  speaking,  is  by  preventing  grace," (9)  they  were  capable  of 
doing  all  the  things  contained  in  the  law.  He  affirms,  too,  that  all 
such  Gentiles  as  were  thus  obedient,  should  be  "justified,  in  the 
day  when  God  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men,  by  Jesus  Christ, 
(9)  Wesley's  Notes,  in  loc. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITL'TKs.  179 

according  to  his  Gospel."  The  possible  obedience  and  the  possible 
"justification"  of  heathens  who  have  no  written  revelation  are  points, 
therefore,  distinctly  affirmed  by  the  apostle  in  his  discourse  in  the 
second  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  the  whole  matter 
of  God's  sovereignty,  as  to  the  heathen,  is  reduced,  not  to  the  leaving 
of  any  portion  of  our  race  without  the  means  of  salvation,  and  then 
punishing  them  for  sins  which  they  have  no  means  of  avoiding  ;  but 
to  the  fact  of  his  having  given  superior  advantages  to  us,  and  inferior 
ones  only  to  them  ;  a  proceeding  which  we  see  exemplified  in  the 
most  enlightened  of  Christian  nations  every  day,  for  neither  every 
part  of  the  same  nation  is  equally  favoured  with  the  means  of  grace, 
nor  are  all  the  families  living  in  the  same  town  and  neighbourhood 
equally  circumstanced  as  to  means  of  religious  influence  and  im- 
provement. The  principle  of  this  inequality  is,  however,  far  different 
from  that  on  which  Calvinistic  reprobation  is  sustained;  since  it 
involves  no  inevitable  exclusion  of  any  individual  from  the  kingdom 
of  God,  and  because  the  general  principle  of  God's  administration 
in  such  cases  is  elsewhere  laid  down  to  be,  the  requiring  of  much 
where  much  is  given,  and  the  requiring  of  little  where  little  is  given  : 
■ — a  principle  of  the  strictest  equity. 

An  unguarded  opinion  as  to  the  irresistibility  of  grace,  and 
the  passiveness  of  man  in  conversion,  has  also  been  assumed,  and 
made  to  give  an  air  of  plausibility  to  the  predestinarian  scheme.  It 
is  argued,  if  our  salvation  is  of  God  and  not  of  ourselves,  then  those 
only  can  be  saved  to  whom  God  gives  the  grace  of  conversion  ;  and 
the  rest,  not  having  this  grace  afforded  them,  are,  by  the  inscrutable 
counsel  of  God,  passed  by,  and  reprobated. 

This  is  an  argument  a  posteriori ;  from  the  assumed  passiveness 
of  man  in  conversion  to  the  election  of  a  part  only  of  mankind  to 
life.  The  argument  a  priori  is  from  partial  election  to  life  to  the 
doctrine  of  irresistible  grace,  as  the  means  by  which  the  Divine 
decree  is  carried  into  effect.  The  doctrine  of  such  an  election  has 
already  been  refuted,  and  it  will  be  easy  to  show  that  it  derives  no 
support  from  the  assumption  that  grace  must  work  irresistibly  in 
man  in  order  that  the  honour  of  our  salvation  may  be  secured  to 
God,  which  is  the  plausible  dress  in  which  the  doctrine  is  generally 
presented. 

It  is  allowed,  and  all  scriptural  advocates  of  the  universal  re- 
demption of  mankind  will  join  with  the  Calvinists  in  maintaining 
the  doctrine,  that  every  disposition  and  inclination  to  good  which 
originally  existed  in  the  nature  of  man  is  lost  by  the  fall ;  that  all 
men,  in  their  simply  natural  state,  are  "  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins," 
and  have  neither  the  will  nor  the  power  to  turn  to  God  ;  and  that 


ISO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  '  [PAKT 

no  one  is  sufficient  of  himself  to  think  or  do  any  thing  of  a  saving 
tendency.  But,  as  all  men  are  required  to  do  those  things  which 
have  a  saving  tendency,  we  contend,  that  the  grace  to  do  them  has 
been  bestowed  upon  all.  Equally  sacred  is  the  doctrine  to  be  held, 
that  no  person  can  repent  or  truly  believe  except  under  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  and  that  we  have  no  ground  of  boasting 
in  ourselves,  but  that  all  the  glory  of  our  salvation,  commenced  and 
consummated,  is  to  be  given  to  God  alone,  as  the  result  of  the 
freeness  and  riches  of  his  grace. 

It  will  also  be  freely  allowed,  that  the  visitations  of  the  gracious 
influences  of  the~  Holy  Spirit  are  vouchsafed  in  the  first  instance, 
and  in  numberless  other  subsequent  cases,  quite  independent  of  our 
seeking  them  or  desire  for  them  ;  and  that  when  our  thoughts  are 
thus  turned  to  serious  considerations,  and  various  exciting  and 
quickening  feelings  are  produced  within  us,  we  are  often  wholly 
passive  ;  and  also,  that  men  are  sometimes  suddenly  and  irresisti- 
bly awakened  to  a  sense  of  their  guilt  and  danger  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  either  through  the  preaching  of  the  word  instrumentally  or 
through  other  means,  and  sometimes,  even,  independent  of  any 
external  means  at  all ;  and  are  thus  constrained  to  cry  out,  "  What 
must  I  do  to  be  saved  I"  All  this  is  confirmed  by  plain  verity  of 
Holy  Writ ;  and  is,  also,  as  certain  a  matter  of  experience  as  that 
the  motions  of  the  Holy  Spirit  do  often  silently  intermingle  them- 
selves with  our  thoughts,  reasonings,  and  consciences,  and  breathe 
their  milder  persuasions  upon  our  affections. 

From  these  premises  the  conclusions  which  legitimately  flow, 
are  in  direct  opposition  to  the  Calvinistic  hypothesis.  They  esta- 
blish, 

1.  The  justice  of  God  in  the  condemnation  of  men,  which  their 
doctrine  leaves  under  a  dark  and  impenetrable  cloud.  More  or 
less  of  these  influences  from  on  high  visit  the  finally  impenitent,  so 
as  to  render  their  destruction  their  own  act  by  resisting  them. 
This  is  proved,  from  the  "  Spirit"  having  "  strove"  with  those  who 
were  finally  destroyed  by  the  flood  of  Noah ;  from  the  case  of  the 
finally  impenitent  Jews  and  their  ancestors,  who  are  charged  with 
"  always  resisting  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  from  the  case  of  the  apostates 
mentioned  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  who  are  said  to  have  done 
"  despite  to  the  Spirit  of  grace ;"  and  from  the  solemn  warnings 
given  to  men  in  the  New  Testament,  not  to  "  grieve"  and  "  quench5* 
the  Holy  Spirit.  If,  therefore,  it  appears  that  the  destruction  of 
men  is  attributed  to  their  resistance  of  those  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  which,  but  for  that  resistance,  would  have  been  saving,  ac- 
cording to  the  design  of  God  in  imparting  them,  then  is  the  justice 


Wb'OND.]  IHEULOGRAL  INSTITUTES^  I8J 

of  God  manifested  in  their  punishment;  and  it  follows,  also,  that 
his  grace  so  works  in  men,  as  to  be  both  sufficient  to  lead  them  into 
a  state  of  salvation,  and  even  actually  to  place  them  in  this  state, 
and  yet  so  as  to  be  capable  of  being  finally  and  fatally  frustrated. 

2.  These  premises,  also,  secure  the  glory  of  our  salvation  to  the 
grace  of  God ;  but  not  by  implying  the  Calvinistic  notion  of  the 
continued  and  uninterrupted  irresistibility  of  the  influence  of  grace 
and  the  passiveness  of  man,  so  as  to  deprive  him  of  his  agency ;  but 
by  showing  that  his  agency,  even  when  rightly  directed,  is  upheld 
and  influenced  by  the  superior  power  of  God,  and  yet  so  as  to  be 
still  his  own.  For,  in  the  instance  of  the  mightiest  visitation  we  can 
produce  from  Scripture,  that  of  St.  Paul,  we  see  where  the  irresisti- 
ble influence  terminated,  and  where  his  own  agency  recommenced. 
Under  the  impulse  of  the  conviction  struck  into  his  mind,  as  well 
as  under  the  dazzling  brightness  which  fell  upon  his  eyes,  he  was 
passive,  and  the  effect  produced  for  the  time  necessarily  followed  ; 
but  all  the  actions  consequent  upon  this  were  the  results  of  delibe- 
ration and  personal  choice.  He  submits  to  be  taught  in  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ ;  "  he  confers  not  with  flesh  and  blood  ;"  "  he  is  not 
disobedient  to  the  heavenly  vision  ;"  "  he  faints  not"  under  the  bur- 
thensome  ministry  he  had  received ;  and  he  "  keeps  his  body  under 
subjection,  lest  after  having  preached  to  others  he  should  himself 
become  a  cast  away."  All  these  expressions,  so  descriptive  of 
consideration  and  choice,  show  that  the  irresistible  impulse  was  not 
permanent,  and  that  he  was  subsequently  left  to  improve  it  or  not, 
though  under  a  powerful  but  still  a  resistible  motive  operating  upon 
him  to  remain  faithful. 

For  the  gentler  emotions  produced  by  the  Spirit,  these  are,  as 
the  experience  of  all  Christians  testifies,  the  ordinary  and  general 
manner  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  carries  on  his  work  in  man ;  and, 
if  all  good  desires,  resolves,  and  aspirations,  are  from  him,  and  not 
from  our  own  nature,  (and,  if  we  are  utterly  fallen,  from  our  own 
nature  they  cannot  be,)  then,  if  any  man  is  conscious  of  having 
ever  checked  good  desires,  and  of  having  opposed  his  own  convic- 
tions and  better  feelings,  he  has  in  himself  abundant  proof  of  the 
resistibiiity  of  grace,  and  of  the  superability  of  those  good  inclina- 
tions which  the  Spirit  is  pleased  to  impart.  He  is  equally  conscious 
of  the  pow*?r  of  complying  with  them,  though  still  in  the  strength  of 
grace,  which  yet,  whilst  it  works  in  him  "  to  will  and  to  do,"  neither 
wills  nor  acts  for  him,  nor  even  by  him,  as  a  passive  instrument. 
For  if  men  were  wholly  and  at  all  times  passive  under  divine  influ- 
ence ;  not  merely  in  the  reception  of  it,  for  all  are,  in  that  respect, 
passive  ;  but,  in  the  actings  of  it  to  practical  ends,  then  would  there 


A&2  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

be  nothing  to  mark  the  difference  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked  but  an  act  of  God,  which  is  utterly  irreconcilable  to  the 
Scriptures.  They  call  the  former  "  obedient,"  the  latter  "  disobe- 
dient ;"  one  "  willing,"  the  other  "  unwilling ;"  and  promise  or 
threaten  accordingly.  They  attribute  the  destruction  of  the  one  to 
their  refusal  of  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  salvation  of  the  other,  as 
the  instrumental  cause,  to  their  acceptance  of  it ;  and  to  urge  that 
that  personal  act  by  which  we  receive  the  grace  of  Christ,  detracts 
from  his  glory  as  our  Saviour  by  attributing  our  salvation  to  our- 
selves, is  to  speak  as  absurdly  as  if  we  should  say  that  the  act  of 
obedience  and  faith  required  of  the  man  who  was  commanded  to 
stretch  out  his  withered  arm,  detracted  from  the  glory  of  Christ's 
healing  virtue,  by  which,  indeed,  the  power  of  complying  with  the 
command,  and  the  condition  of  his  being  healed,  was  imparted. 

It  is  by  such  reasonings,  made  plausible  to  many  minds,  by  an 
affectation  of  metaphysical  depth  and  subtilty,  or  by  pretensions  of 
magnifying  the  sovereignty  and  grace  of  God,  (often,  we  doubt  not, 
very  sincere,)  that  the  theory  of  election  and  reprobation,  as  held 
by  the  followers  of  Calvin  with  some  shades  of  difference,  but  in 
all  substantially  the  same,  has  had  currency  given  to  it  in  the  church 
of  Christ  in  these  latter  ages.  How  unsound  and  how  contrary  to 
the  Scriptures  they  are,  may  appear  from  that  brief  refutation  of 
them  just  given ;  but  I  repeat  what  was  said  above,  that  we  are 
never  to  forget  that  this  system  has  generally  had  interwoven  with 
it  many  of  the  most  vital  points  of  Christianity.  It  is  this  which  has 
kept  it  in  existence  ;  for  otherwise  it  had  never,  probably,  held 
itself  up  against  the  opposing  evidence  of  so  many  plain  Scriptures, 
and  that  sense  of  the  benevolence  and  equity  of  God,  which  his 
own  revelations,  as  well  as  natural  reason,  has  riveted  in  the  con- 
victions of  mankind.  In  one  respect  the  Calvinistic  and  the  Soci- 
nian  schemes  have  tacitly  confessed  the  evidence  of  the  word  of 
God  to  be  against  them.  The  latter  has  shrunk  from  the  letter  and 
common  sense  interpretation  of  Scripture  within  the  clouds  raised 
by  a  licentious  criticism  ;  the  other  has  chosen  rather  to  find  refuge 
in  the  mists  of  metaphysical  theories.  Nothing  is,  however,  here 
meant  by  this  juxta-position  of  theories  so  contrary  to  each  other, 
but  that  both  thus  confess,  that  the  prima  facie  evidence  afforded  by 
the  word  of  God  is  not  in  their  favour.  If  we  intendedjmore  by 
thus  naming  on  the  same  page  systems  so  opposite,  one  o$  which, 
with  all  its  faults,  contains  all  that  truth  by  which  men  may  be 
saved,  whilst  the  other  excludes  it,  "  we  should  offend  against  the 
generation  of  the  children  of  Gon." 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  183 

CHAPTER  XXIX. 

Redemption — Further  Benefits. 

Having  endeavoured  to  establish  the  doctrine  of  the  universal  re- 
demption of  the  human  race,  the  enumeration  of  the  leading  blessings 
which  flow  from  it  may  now  be  resumed.  We  have  already  spoken 
of  justification,  adoption,  regeneration,  and  the  witness  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  we  proceed  to  another  as  distinctly  marked,  and  as 
graciously  promised  in  the  Holy  Scriptures :  this  is  the  entire 
sanctification,  or  the  perfected  holiness  of  believers  ;  and  as 
this  doctrine,  in  some  of  its  respects,  has  been  the  subject  of  con- 
troversy, the  scriptural  evidence  of  it  must  be  appealed  to  and 
examined.  Happily  for  us,  a  subject  of  so  great  importance  is  not 
involved  in  obscurity. 

That  a  distinction  exists  between  a  regenerate  state  and  a  state 
of  entire  and  perfect  holiness  will  be  generally  allowed.  Regene- 
ration, we  have  seen,  is  concomitant  with  justification  ;  but  the 
apostles,  in  addressing  the  body  of  believers  in  the  churches  to 
whom  they  wrote  their  epistles,  set  before  them,  both  in  the  prayers 
they  offer  in  their  behalf,  and  in  the  exhortations  they  administer, 
a  still  higher  degree  of  deliverance  from  sin,  as  well  as  a  higher 
growth  in  Christian  virtues.  Two  passages  only  need  be  quoted  to 
prove  this.  1  Thess.  v,  23,  "  And  the  very  God  of  peace  sanctify 
you  wholly,  and  I  pray  God  your  whole  spirit  and  soul  and  body  be 
preserved  blameless  unto  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 
2  Cor.  vii,  1,  "  Having  these  promises,  dearly  beloved,  let  us  cleanse 
ourselves  from  all  filthiness  of  the  flesh  and  spirit,  perfecting  holi- 
ness in  the  fear  of  God."  In  both  these  passages  deliverance  from 
sin  is  the  subject  spoken  of;  and  the  prayer  in  one  instance  and 
the  exhortation  in  the  other  goes  to  the  extent  of  the  entire  sancti- 
fication of  "  the  soul"  and  "  spirit,"  as  well  as  of  the  "  flesh"  ot 
"  body,"  from  all  sin  ;  by  which  can  only  be  meant  our  complete 
deliverance  from  all  spiritual  pollution,  all  inward  depravation  of" 
the  heart,  as  well  as  that  which,  expressing  itself  outwardly  by  the 
indulgence  of  the  senses,  is  called  "  filthiness  of  the  flesh." 

The  attainableness  of  such  a  state  is  not  so  much  a  matter  of 
debate  among  Christians  as  the  time  when  we  are  authorized  to 
expect  it.  For  as  it  is  an  axiom  of  Christian  doctrine,  that  "  with- 
out holiness  no  man  can  see  the  Lord  ;"  and  is  equally  clear  that 
if  we  would  "  be  found  of  him  in  peace"  we  must  be  found  "  with- 


184  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  (PART 

out  spot,  and  blameless ;"  and  that  the  church  will  be  presented  by 
Christ  to  the  Father  without  "  fault ;"  so  it  must  be  concluded, 
unless,  on  the  one  hand,  we  greatly  pervert  the  sense  of  these  pas- 
sages, or,  on  the  other,  admit  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  or  some 
intermediate  purifying  institution,  that  the  entire  sanctification  of 
the  soul,  and  its  complete  renewal  in  holiness,  must  take  place  in 
this  world. 

Whilst  this  is  generally  acknowledged,  however,  among  spiritual 
Christians,  it  has  been  warmly  contended  by  many,  that  the  final 
stroke,  which  destroys  our  natural  corruption,  is  only  given  at 
death ;  and  that  the  soul,  when  separated  from  the  body,  and  not 
before,  is  capable  of  that  immaculate  purity  which  these  passages, 
doubtless,  exhibit  to  our  hope. 

If  this  view  can  be  refuted,  then  it  must  follow,  unless  a  purga- 
tory of  some  description  be  allowed  after  death,  that  the  entire 
sanctification  of  believers  at  any  time  previous  to  their  dissolution, 
and  in  the  full  sense  of  these  evangelic  promises,  is  attainable. 

To  the  opinion  in  question,  then,  there  appear  to  be  the  follow- 
ing fatal  objections : 

1.  That  we  nowhere  find  the  promises  of  entire  sanctification 
restricted  to  the  article  of  death,  either  expressly,  or  in  fair  infer- 
ence from  any  passage  of  Holy  Scripture. 

2.  That  we  nowhere  find  the"  circumstance  of  the  soul's  union 
with  the  body  represented  as  a  necessary  obstacle  to  its  entire 
sanctification. 

The  principal  passage  which  has  been  urged  in  proof  of  this  from 
the  New  Testament,  is  that  part  of  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Romans,  in  which  St.  Paul,  speaking  in  the  first  person 
of  the  bondage  of  the  flesh,  has  been  supposed  to  describe  his  state, 
as  a  believer  in  Christ.  But,  whether  he  speaks  of  himself,  or  de- 
scribes the  state  of  others  in  a  supposed  case,  given  for  the  sake  of 
more  vivid  representation  in  the  first  person,  which  is  much  more 
probable,  he  is  clearly  speaking  of  a  person  who  had  once  sought 
justification  by  the  works  of  the  law,  but  who  was  then  convinced, 
by  the  force  of  a  spiritual  apprehension  of  the  extent  of  the  acquire- 
ments of  that  law,  and  by  constant  failures  in  his  attempts  to  keep 
it  perfectly,  that  he  was  in  bondage  to  his  corrupt  nature,  and  could 
only  be  delivered  from  this  thraldom  by  the  interposition  of  another. 
For,  not  to  urge  that  his  strong  expressions  of  being  "  carnal,"  "  sold 
under  sin,"  and  doing  always  "the  things  which  he  would  not," 
are  utterly  inconsistent  with  that  moral  state  of  believers  in  Christ 
which  he  describes  in  the  next  chapter ;  and,  especially,  that  he 
there  declares  that  such  as  are  in  Christ  Jesus  "  walk  not  after  the 


SECOND.']  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  185 

flesh,  but  after  the  spirit  ;"•  the  seventh  chapter  itself  contains 
decisive  evidence  against  the  inference  which  the  advocates  of  the 
necessary  continuance  of  sin  till  death  have  drawn  from  it.  The 
apostle  declares  the  person  whose  case  he  describes,  to  be  under 
the  late,  and  not  in  a  state  of  deliverance  by  Christ ;  and  then  he 
represents  him  not  only  as  despairing  of  self  deliverance,  and  a's 
praying  for  the  interposition  of  a  sufficiently  powerful  deliverer,  but 
as  thanking  God  that  the  very  deliverance  for  which  he  groans  is 
appointed  to  be  administered  to  him  by  Jesus  Christ.  "  Who  shall 
deliver  me  from  the  body  of  this  death  %  I  thank  God  through  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord." 

This  is,  also,  so  fully  confirmed  by  what  the  apostle  had  said  in 
the  preceding  chapter,  where  he  unquestionably  describes  the  mom! 
state  of  true  believers,  that  nothing  is  more  surprising  than  that  so 
perverted  a  comment  upon  the  seventh  chapter,  as  that  to  which 
we  have  adverted,  should  have  been  adopted  or  persevered  in. 
"What  shall  we  say  then  1  Shall  we  continue  in  sin,  that  grace  may 
abound  ]  God  forbid  !  How  shall  we,  who  are  dead  to  sin,  live  any 
longer  therein  1  Know  ye  not,  that  so  many  of  us  as  were  baptized 
into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized  into  his  death  ]  Therefore,  we  are 
buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death,  that  like  as  Christ  was 
raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even  so  we 
also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life.  For  if  we  have  been  planted 
together  in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall  be,  also,  in  the  like- 
ness of  his  resurrection ;  knowing  this,  that  our  old  man  is  cruci- 
fied with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  destroyed  that 
henceforth  Ave  should  not  serve  sin  ;  for  he  that  is  dead  is  freed 
from  sin."  So  clearly  does  the  apostle  show  that  he  who  is 
bound  to  the  "  body  of  death,"  as  mentioned  in  the  seventh  chapter, 
is  not  in  the  state  of  a  believer ;  and  that  he  who  has  a  true  faith 
in  Christ,  "  is  freed  from  sin." 

It  is  somewhat  singular,  that  the  divines  of  the  Calvinistic  school 
should  be  almost  uniformly  the  zealous  advocates  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  continuance  of  indwelling  sin  till  death  ;  but  it  is  but  justice  to 
say,  that  several  of  them  have  as  zealously  denied  that  the  apostle, 
in  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  Romans,  decribes  the  state  of  one  who 
is  justified  by  faith  in  Christ,  and  very  properly  consider  the  case 
there  spoken  of  as  that  of  one  struggling  in  legal  bondage,  and 
brought  to  that  point  of  self  despair  and  of  conviction  of  sin  and 
helplessness  which  must  always  precede  an  entire  trust  in  the  merits 
of  Christ's  death,  and  the  power  of  his  salvation. 

.'3.  The  doctrine  before  us  is  disproved  by  those  passages  of 
Scripture  which  connect  our  entire  soncriTicatJon  with  subsequent 

Voi   IIT  ;U 


I&&  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  ^PAR'i 

habits  and  acts,  to  be  exhibited  in  the  conduct  of  believers  before 
death.  So  in  the  quotation  from  Rom.  vi,  just  given, — "  knowing 
this,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  destroyed,  that  henceforth  we 
should  not  serve  sin."  So  the  exhortation  in  2  Cor.  vii,  1,  also 
given  above,  refers  to  the  present  life,  and  not  to  the  future  hour 
of  -our  dissolution ;  and  in  1  Thess.  v,  23,  the  apostle  first  prays 
for  the  entire  sanctification  of  the  Thessalonians,  and  then  for  their 
preservation  in  that  hallowed  state,  "  unto  the  coming  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  C  hrist. " 

4.  It  is  disproved,  also,  by  all  those  passages  which  require  us 
to  bring  forth  those  graces  and  virtues  which  are  usually  called  the 
fruits  of  the  Spirit.  That  these  are  to  be  produced  during  our  life 
and  to  be  displayed  in  our  spirit  and  conduct  cannot  be  doubted ; 
and  we  may  then  ask  whether  they  are  required  of  us  in  perfection 
and  maturity  1  If  so,  in  this  degree  of  maturity  and  perfection,  they 
necessarily  suppose  the  entire  sanctification  of  the  soul  from  the 
opposite  and  antagonist  evils.  Meekness  in  its  perfection  supposes 
the  extinction  of  all  sinful  anger;  perfect  love  to  God,  supposes 
that  no  atfection  remains  contrary' to  it ;  and  so  of  every  other  per- 
fect internal  virtue.  The  inquiry,  then,  is  reduced  to  this,  whether 
these  graces,  in  such  perfection  as  to  exclude  the  opposite  corrup- 
tions of  the  heart,  are  of  possible  attainment.  If  they  are  not,  then 
we  cannot  love  God  with  our  whole  hearts ;  then  we  must  be 
sometimes  sinfully  angry ;  and  how,  in  that  case,  are  we  to  inter- 
pret that  perfectness  in  these  graces  which  God  hath  required  of  us, 
and  promised  to  us  in  the  Gospel  1  For  if  the  perfection  meant  (and 
let  it  be  observed  that  this  is  a  scriptural  term,  and  must  mean 
something)  be  so  comparative  as  that  we  may  be  sometimes  sinfully 
angry,  and  may  sometimes  divide  our  hearts  between  God  and  the 
creature,  we  may  apply  the  same  comparative  sense  of  the  term  to 
good  words  and  to  good  works,  as  well  as  to  good  affections.  Thus 
when  the  apostle  prays  for  the  Hebrews,  "  Now  the  God  of  peace 
that  brought  again  from  the  dead  our  Lord  Jesus,  that  great  Shep- 
herd of  the  sheep,  through  the  blood  of  the  everlasting  covenant, 
make  you  perfect  in  every  good  work,  to  do  his  will,"  we  must 
understand  this  perfection  of  evangelical  good  works  so  that  it  shall 
sometimes  give  place  to  opposite  evil  works,  just  as  good  affections 
must  necessarily  sometimes  give  place  to  the  opposite  bad  affections. 
This  view  can  scarcely  be  soberly  entertained  by  any  enlightened 
Christian;  and  it  must,  therefore,  be  concluded,  that  the  standard 
of  our  attainable  Christian  perfection,  as  to  the  affections,  is  a  love 
of  God  so  perfect  as  to  "  rule  the  heart"  and  exclude  all  rivalry, 
and  a  meekness  so  perfect  as  to  cast  out  all  sinful  anger  and  prevent 


JfB&OKD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  18? 

its  return ;  and  that  as  to  good  works  the  rule  is,  that  we  shall  be 
so  "  perfect  in  every  good  work,"  as  to  "  do  the  will  of  God" 
habitually,  fully,  and  constantly.  If  we  fix  the  standard  lower  we 
let  in  a  license  totally  inconsistent  with  that  Christian  purity  which 
is  allowed  by  all  to  be  attainable,  arid  we  make  every  man  himself 
his  own  interpreter  of  that  comparative  perfection  which  is  often 
contended  for  as  that  only  which  is  attainable. 

Some,  it  is  true,  admit  the  extent  of  the  promises  and  the  require- 
ments of  the  Gospel  as  we  have  stated  them ;  but  they  contend, 
that  this  is  the  mark  at  which  we  are  to  aim,  the  standard  towards 
which  we  are  to  aspire,  though  neither  is  attainable  fully  till  death. 
But  this  view  cannot  be  true  as  applied  to  sanctification  or  deliver- 
ance from  all  inward  and  outward  sin.  That  the  degree  of  every 
virtue  implanted  by  grace  is  not  limited,  but  advances  and  grows 
in  the  living  Christian  throughout  life,  may  be  granted  ;  and  through 
eternity  also :  but  to  say  that  these  virtues  are  not  attainable, 
through  the  work  of  the  Spirit,  in  that  degree  which  shall  destroy 
all  opposite  vice,  is  to  say,  that  God,  under  the  Gospel  requires  us 
to  be  what  we  cannot  be,  either  through  want  of  efficacy  in  his 
grace,  or  from  some  defect  in  its  administration  ;  neither  of  which 
has  any  countenance  from  Scripture,  nor  is  at  all  consistent  with 
the  terms  in  which  the  promises  and  exhortations  of  the  Gospel  are 
expressed.  It  is  also  contradicted  by  our  own  consciousness,  which 
charges  our  criminal  neglects  and  failures  upon  ourselves,  and  not 
upon  the  grace  of  God,  as  though  it  were  insufficient.  Either  the 
consciences  of  good  men  have  in  all  ages  been  delusive  and  over 
scrupulous;  or  this  doctrine  of  the  necessary,  though  occasional, 
dominion  of  sin  over  us  is  false.  . 

5.  The  doctrine  of  the  necessary  indwelling  of  sin  in  the  soul 
till  death  involves  other  antiscriptural  consequences.  It  supposes 
that  the  seat  of  sin  is  in  the  flesh,  and  thus  harmonizes  with  the' 
pagan  philosophy,  which  attributed  all  evil  to  matter.  The  doctrine 
of  the  Bible,  on  the  contrary,  is,  that  the  seat  of  sin  is  in  the  soul ; 
and  it  makes  it  one  of  the  proofs  of  the  fall  and  corruption  of  our 
spiritual  nature,  that  we  are  in  bondage  to  the  appetites  and  motions 
of  the  flesh.  Nor  does  the  theory  which  places  the  necessity  of 
sinning  in  the  connexion  of  the  soul  with  the  body  account  for  the 
whole  moral  case  of  man.  There  are  sins,  as  pride,  covetousness, 
malice,  and  others,  which  are  wholly  spiritual ;  and  yet  no  exception 
is  made  in  this  doctrine  of  the  necessary  continuance  of  sin  till 
death  as  to  them.  There  is,  surely,  no  need  to  wait  for  the  sepa- 
ration of  the  soul  from  the  body  in  order  to  be  saved  from  evils 
which  are  the  sole  offspring  of  the  spirit ;  and  yet  these  are  made. 


Ifttf  theological  institutes.  [pakx 

as  inevitable  as  the  sins  which  more  immediately  connect  them- 
selves with  the  excitements  of  the  animal  nature. 

This  doctrine  supposes,  too,  that  the  flesh  must  necessarily  not 
only  lust  against  the  Spirit,  but  in  no  small  degree,  and  on  many 
occasions,  be  the  conqueror :  whereas,  we  are  commanded  to 
"  mortify  the  deeds  of  the  body ;"  to  "  crucify,'"  that  is,  to  put  to 
death,  "  the  flesh  ;"  "  to  put  off  the  old  man,"  which,  in  its  full  mean- 
ing, must  import  separation  from  sin  in  fact,  as  well  as  the  renuncia- 
tion of  it  in  will ;  and  "  to  put  on  the  new  man."  Finally,  the  apostle 
expressly  states,  that  though  the  flesh  stands  victoriously  opposed 
to  legal  sanctification,  it  is  not  insuperable  by  evangelical  holiness. 
— "  For  what  the  law  could  not  do  in  that  it  was  weak  through  the 
flesh,  God  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and 
for  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh ;  that  the  righteousness  of  the 
law  might  be  fulfilled  in  us,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after 
the  Spirit,"  Rom.  viii,  3,  4.  So  inconsistent  with  the  declarations 
and  promises  of  the  Gospel  is  the  notion  that,  so  long  as  we  are  in 
the  body,  "  the  flesh"  must  of  necessity  have  at  least  the  occasional 
dominion. 

We  conclude,  therefore,  as  to  the  time  of  our  complete  sanctifi- 
cation ;  or,  to  use  the  phrase  of  the  apostle  Paul,  "  the  destruction 
of  the  body  of  sin  ;"  that  it  can  neither  be  referred  to  the  hour  of 
death,  nor  placed  subsequently  to  this  present  life.  The  attainment 
of  perfect  freedom  from  sin  is  one  to  Avhich  believers  are  called 
during  the  present  life  ;  and  is  necessary  to  that  completeness  of 
"  holiness,"  and  of  those  active  and  passive  graces  of  Christianity 
by  which  they  are  called  to  glorify  God  in  this  world,  and  to  edify 
mankind. 

Not  only  the  time,  but  the  manner  also,  of  our  sanctification  has 
been  matter  of  controversy  :  some  contending  that  all  attainable 
degrees  of  it  are  acquired  by  the  process  of  gradual  mortification 
and  the  acquisition  of  holy  habits  ;  others  alleging  it  to  be  instanta- 
neous, and  the  fruit  of  an  act  of  faith  in  the  Divine  promises. 

That  the  regeneration  which  accompanies  justification  is  a  large 
approach  to  this  state  of  perfected  holiness  ;  and  that  all  dying  to 
sin,  and  all  growth  in  grace,  advances  us  nearer  to  this  point  of 
entire  sanctity,  is  so  obvious,  that  on  these  points  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  dispute.  But  they  are  not  at  all  inconsistent  with  a 
more  instantaneous  work,  when,  the  depth  of  our  natural  depravity 
being  more  painfully  felt,  we  plead  in  faith  the  accomplishment  of 
the  promises  of  God.  The  great  question  to  be  settled  is,  whether 
the  deliverance  sighed  after  be  held  out  to  us  in  these  promises  as 
a  present  blessing  %  And,  from  what  has  been  already  said,  there 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  lbf» 

appears  no  ground  to  doubt  this  ;  since  no  small  violence  would  be 
offered  to  the  passages  of  Scripture  already  quoted,  as  well  as  to 
many  others,  by  the  opposite  opinion.  All  the  promises  of  God 
which  are  not  expressly,  or  from  their  order,  referred  to  future 
time,  are  objects  of  present  trust ;  and  their  fulfilment  now  is  made 
conditional  only  upon  our  faith.  They  cannot,  therefore,  be  pleaded 
in  our  prayers,  with  an  entire  reliance  upon  the  truth  of  God,  in 
vain.  The  general  promise  that  we  shall  receive  "  all  things  what- 
soever we  ask  in  prayer,  believing,"  comprehends,  of  course,  "  all 
things"  suited  to  our  case  which  God  has  engaged  to  bestow  ;  and 
if  the  entire  renewal  of  our  nature  be  included  in  the  number, 
without  any  limitation  of  time,  except  that  in  which  we  ask  it  in 
faith,  then  to  this  faith  shall  the  promises  of  entire  sanctification  be 
given  ;  which,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  supposes  an  instantaneous 
work  immediately  following  upon  our  entire  and  unwavering  faith. 

The  only  plausible  objections  made  to  this  doctrine  may  be 
answered  in  few  words. 

It  has  been  urged,  that  this  state  of  entire  sanctification  supposes 
future  impeccability.  Certainly  not ;  for  if  angels  and  our  first 
parents  fell  when  in  a  state  of  immaculate  sanctity,  the  renovated 
man  cannot  be  placed,  by  his  entire  deliverance  from  inward  sin, 
out  of  the  reach  of  danger.  This  remark,  also,  answers  the  allega- 
tion, that  we  should  thus  be  removed  out  of  the  reach  of  temptation  ; 
for  the  example  of  angels  and  of  the  first  man,  who  fell  by  tempta- 
tion when  in  a  state  of  native  purity,  proves  that  the  absence  of 
inward  evil  is  not  inconsistent  with  a  state  of  probation ;  and  that 
this,  in  itself,  is  no  guard  against  the  attempts  and  solicitations  of  evil. 

It  has  been  objected,  too,  that  this  supposed  state  renders  the 
atonement  and  intercession  of  Christ  superfluous  in  future.  But 
the  very  contrary  of  this  is  manifest  when  the  case  of  an  evangelical 
renewal  of  the  soul  in  righteousness  is  understood.  This  proceeds 
from  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ,  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the 
efficient  cause ;  it  is  received  by  faith  as  the  instrumental  cause  ; 
and  the  state  itself  into  which  we  are  raised  is  maintained,  not  by 
inherent  native  power,  but  by  the  continual  presence  and  sanctify- 
ing influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  himself,  received  and  retained  in 
answer  to  ceaseless  prayer ;  which  prayer  has  respect  solely  to  the 
merits  of  the  death  and  intercession  of  Christ. 

It  has  been  further  alleged,  that  a  person  delivered  from  all  in- 
ward and  outward  sin  has  no  longer  need  to  use  the  petition  of  the 
Lord's  prayer, — "  and  forgive  us  our  trespasses  ;"  because  he  has 
no  longer  need  of  pardon.  To  this  we  reply,  1.  That  it  would  be 
absurd  to  suppose  that  any  person  is  placed  under  the  necessity  of 


MJO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

"  trespassing,"'  in  order  that  a  general  prayer  designed  for  men  in 
a  mixed  condition  might  retain  its  aptness  to  every  particular  case. 
2.  That  trespassing  of  every  kind  and  degree  is  not  supposed  by 
this  prayer  to  be  continued,  in  order  that  it  might  be  used  always 
in  the  same  import,  or  otherwise  it  might  be  pleaded  against  the 
renunciation  of  any  trespass  or  transgression  whatever.  3.  That 
this  petition  is  still  relevant  to  the  case  of  the  entirely  sanctified  and 
the  evangelically  perfect,  since  neither  the  perfection  of  the  first 
man  nor  that  of  angels  is  in  question  ;  that  is,  a  perfection  measured 
by  the  perfect  law,  which,  in  its  obligations,  contemplates  all  crea- 
tures as  having  sustained  no  injury  by  moral  lapse,  and  admits, 
therefore,  of  no  excuse  from  infirmities  and  mistakes  of  judgment ; 
nor  of  any  degree  of  obedience  below  that  which  beings  created 
naturally  perfect,  were  capable  of  rendering.  There  may,  however, 
be  an  entire  sanctification  of  a  being  rendered  naturally  Aveak  and 
imperfect,  and  so  liable  to  mistake  and  infirmity,  as  well  as  to  defect 
in  the  degree  of  that  absolute  obedience  and  service  which  the  law 
of  God,  never  bent  or  lowered  to  human  weakness,  demands  from 
all.  These  defects,  and  mistakes,  and  infirmities,  may  be  quite 
consistent  with  the  entire  sanctification  of  the  soul,  and  the  moral 
maturity  of  a  being  still  naturally  infirm  and  imperfect.  Still, 
further,  if  this  were  not  a  sufficient  answer,  it  may  be  remarked, 
that  we  are  not  the  ultimate  judges  of  our  own  case  as  to  our  "  tres- 
passes," or  our  exemption  from  them  ;  and  we  are  not,  therefore, 
to  put  ourselves  into  the  place  of  God,  "  who  is  greater  than  our 
hearts."  So,  although  St.  Paul  says,  "  I  know  nothing  by  myself," 
that  is,  I  am  conscious  of  no  offence,  he  adds,  "  yet  am  I  not  hereby 
justified ;  but  he  that  judgeth  me  is  the  Lord  :"  to  whom,  therefore;, 
the  appeal  is  every  moment  to  be  made  through  Christ  the  Media- 
tor, and  who,  by  the  renewed  testimony  of  his  Spirit,  assures  every 
true  believer  of  his  acceptance  in  his  sight. 

Another  benefit  which  accrues  to  all  true  believers,  is  the -right 
to  pray,  with  the  special  assurance  that  they  shall  be  heard  in  all 
things  which  are  according  to  the  will  of  God.  "  And  this  is  the 
confidence  that  we  have  in  him,  that,  if  we  ask  any  thing  accord- 
ing to  his  will,  he  heareth  us."  It  is  under  this  gracious  institution 
that  all  good  men  are  constituted  intercessors  for  others,  even  for 
the  whole  world ;  and  that  God  is  pleased  to  order  many  of  his 
dispensations,  both  as  to  individuals  and  to  nations,  in  reference  to 
"his  elect  who  cry  day  and  night  unto  him." 

With  respect  to  every  real  member  of  the  body  or  church  of 
Christ,  the  providence  of  God  is  special;  in  other  words,  they  are 
individually  considered  in  the  administration  of  the  affairs  of  this  fife 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  191 

by  the  Sovereign  Ruler,  and  their  measure  of  good  and  of  evil  is 
appointed  with  constant  reference  to  their  advantage,  either  in  this 
fife  or  in  eternity.  "  The  hairs  of  their  head"  are,  therefore,  said 
to  be  "  numbered,"  and,  "  all  things"  are  declared  "  to  work  toge- 
ther for  their  good." 

To  them  also  victory  over  death  is  awarded.  They  are  freed 
from  its  fear  in  respect  of  consequences  in  another  state  ;  for  the 
apprehension  of  future  punishment  is  removed  by  the  remission  ol 
their  sins,  and  the  attestation  of  this  to  their  minds  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  whilst  a  patient  resignation  to  the  will  of  God,  as  to  the  mea- 
sure of  their  bodily  sufferings,  and  the  strong  hopes  aud  joyful  anti- 
cipations of  a  better  life  cancel  and  subdue  that  horror  of  pain  and 
dissolution  which  is  natural  to  man.  "  Forasmuch,*  then,  as  the 
children  are  partakers  of  flesh  and  blood,  he,  also,  himself  took  part 
of  the  same,  that,  through  death,  he  might  destroy  him  that  had  the 
power  of  death,  that  is,  the  devil,  and  deliver  them,  who,  through 
fear  of  death,  were  all  their  life  time  subject  to  bondage,"  Heb.  ii, 
14,  15. 

The  immediate  reception  op  the  soul  into  a  state  of 
blessedness  after  death,  is  also  another  of  the  glorious  promises 
of  the  new  covenant  to  all  them  that  endure  to  the  end,  and  "  die 
in  the  Lord." 

This  is  so  explicitly  taught  in  the  New  Testament,  that,  but  for 
the  admission  of  a  philosophical  error,  it  would,  probably,  have 
never  been  doubted  by  any  persons  professing  to  receive  that  book, 
as  of  Divine  authority.  Till,  in  recent  times,  the  belief  in  the 
materiality  of  the  human  soul  was  chiefly  confined  to  those  who 
entirely  rejected  the  Christian  revelation  ;  but,  when  the  Socinians 
adopted  this  notion,  without  wholly  rejecting  the  Scriptures,  it  was 
promptly  perceived  that  the  doctrine  of  an  intermediate  state,  and 
the  materiality  of  the  soul,  could  not  be  maintained  together  ;(1) 
and  the  most  violent  and  disgraceful  criticisms  and  evasions  have, 
therefore,  by  this  class  of  interpreters  been  resorted  to,  in  order  to 
save  a  notion  as  unphilosophical  as  it  is  contrary  to  the  word  of 
God.  Nothing  can  be  more  satisfactory  than  the  observations  of 
Dr.  Campbell  on  this  subject. 

"  Many  expressions  of  Scripture,  in  the  natural  and  obvious 
sense,  imply  that  an  intermediate  and  separate  state  of  the  soul  is 

(1)  A  few  divines,  and  but  few,  have  also  been  found,  who,  still  admitting  the 
essential  distinction  between  body  and  spirit,  have  thought  that  their  separation 
by  death  incapacitated  the  soul  for  the  exercise  of  its  powers.  This  suspension 
they  call  "  the  sleep  of  the  soul."  With  the  materialist  death  causes  tho  entire 
annihilation,  for  the  time,  of  the  thinking  property  of  matter.  Bothopinipns  arj>; 
'Wvever,  reflated  by  tho  same  scriptural  arguments. 


192  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

actually  to  succeed  death.  Such  are  the  words  of  the  Lord  to  the 
penitent  thief  upon  the  cross,  Luke  xxiii,  43.  Stephen's  dying 
.petition,  Acts  vii,  59.  The  comparisons  which  the  apostle  Paul 
makes  in  different  places,  (2  Cor.  v,  6,  &c ;  Phil,  i,  21,)  between 
the  enjoyment  which  true  Christians  can  attain  by  their  continuance 
in  this  world,  and  that  which  they  enter  on  at  their  departure  out 
of  it,  and  several  other  passages.  Let  the  words  referred  to  be  read 
by  any  judicious  person,  either  in  the  original  or  in  the  common 
translation,  which  is  sufficiently  exact  for  this  purpose,  and  let  him, 
setting  aside  all  theory  or  system,  say,  candidly,  whether  they  would 
not  be  understood,  by  the  gross  of  mankind,  as  presupposing  that 
the  soul  may  and  will  exist  separately  from  the  body,  and  be  sus- 
ceptible of  happiness  or  misery  in  that  state.  If  any  thing  could 
add  to  the  native  evidence  of  the  expressions,  it  would  be  the  unna- 
tural meanings  that  are  put  upon  them,  in  order  to  disguise  that 
evidence.  What  shall  we  say  of  the  metaphysical  distinction  intro- 
duced for  this  purpose  between  absolute  and  relative  time  1  The 
apostle  Paul,  they  are  sensible,  speaks  of  the  saints  as  admitted  to 
enjoyment  in  the  presence  of  God,  immediately  after  death.  Now, 
to  palliate  the  direct  contradiction  there  is  in  this  to  their  doctrine, 
that  the  vital  principle,  which  is  all  they  mean  by  the  soul,  remains 
extinguished  between  death  and  the  resurrection,  they  remind  us  of 
the  difference  there  is  between  absolute  or  real  and  relative  or  appa- 
rent time.  They  admit,  that  if  the  apostle  be  understood  as  speak- 
ing of  real  time,  what  is  said  flatly  contradicts  their  system  ;  but, 
say  they,  his  words  must  be  interpreted  as  spoken  only  of  apparent 
time.  He  talks,  indeed,  of  entering  on  a  state  of  enjoyment  imme- 
diately after  death,  though  there  may  be  many  thousands  of  years 
between  the  one  and  the  other ;  for  he  means  only,  that  when  that 
state  shall  commence,  however  distant,  in  reality,  the  time  may  be, 
the  person  entering  upon  it  will  not  be  sensible  of  that  distance, 
and,  consequently,  there  will  be  to  him  an  apparent  coincidence 
with  the  moment  of  his  death.  But  does  the  apostle  any  where  give 
a  hint  that  this  is  his  meaning  1  or  is  it  what  any  man  would  natu- 
rally discover  from  his  words  1  That  it  is  exceedingly  remote  from 
the  common  use  of  language,  I  believe  hardly  any  of  those,  who 
favour  this  scheme,  will  be  partial  enough  to  deny.  Did  the  sacred 
penman  then  mean  to  put  a  cheat  upon  the  world,  and,  by  the  help 
of  an  equivocal  expression,  to  flatter  men  with  the  hope  of  entering, 
the  instant  they  expire,  on  a  state  of  felicity,  when,  in  fact,  they 
knew  that  it  would  be  many  ages  before  it  would  take  place  1  But 
were  the  hypothesis  about  the  extinction  of  the  mind  between  death 
and  the  resurrection  well  founded,  the  apparent  coincidence  they 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  193 

speak  of  is  not  so  clear  as  they  seem  to  think  it.  For  my  part, 
I  cannot  regard  it  as  an  axiom,  and  I  never  heard  of  any  who 
attempted  to  demonstrate  it.  To  me  it  appears  merely  a  corollary 
from  Mr.  Locke's  doctrine,  which  derives  our  conceptions  of  time 
from  the  succession  of  our  ideas,  which,  whether  true  or  false,  is  a 
doctrine  to  be  found  only  among  certain  philosophers,  and  which, 
we  may  reasonably  believe,  never  came  into  the  heads  of  those  to 
whom  the  Gospel,  in  the  apostolic  age,  was  announced. 

"  I  remark  that  even  the  curious  equivocations  (or,  perhaps, 
more  properly,  mental  reservation)  that  has  been  devised  for  them, 
will  not,  in  every  case,  save  the  credit  of  apostolical  veracity.     The 
words  of  Paul  to  the  Corinthians  are,  knowing  that  whilst  ice  are  at 
home  in  the  body,  we  are  absent  from  tlie  Lord ;  again,  we  are  willing 
rather  to  be  absent  from  the  body  and  present  with  the  Lord.     Could 
such  expressions  have  been  used  by  him,  if  he  had  held  it  impossi- 
ble to  be  with  the  Lord,  or,  indeed,  anywhere,  without  the  body ; 
and  that,  whatever  the  change  was  which  was  made  by  death,  he 
could  not  be  in  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  till  he  returned  to  the 
body?  Absence  from  the  body,  and  presence  with  the  Lord,  were 
never,  therefore,  more  unfortunately  combined,  than  in  this  illus- 
tration.    Things  are  combined  here  as  coincident,  which,  on  the 
hypothesis  of  those  gentlemen,  are  incompatible.     If  recourse  be 
had  to  the  original,  the  expressions  in  Greek  are,  if  possible,  still 
stronger.      They  are,  o»  sv^fjiouvres  sv  rw  du^an,  those  who  divell  in 
the  body,  who  are  sxSr^avrss  atfo  <rs  Ku^is,  at  a  distance  from  the  Lord. 
As,  on  the  contrary,  they  are  Si  sx^fj^vrs?  sx  m  tfuparog,  those  who 
have  travelled  out  of  the  body,  who  are  01  evSrurnvrsg  ifiog  rov  Ku^iov, 
those  loho  reside,  or  are  present  with  the  Lord.     In  the  passage  to  the 
Philippians,  also,  the    commencement  of  his  presence  with  the 
Lord  is  represented  as  coincident,  not  with  his  return  to  the  body, 
but  with  his  leaving  it ;  with  the  dissolution,  not  with  the  restora- 
tion of  the  union. 

"  From  the  tenor  of  the  New  Testament,  the  sacred  writers 
appear  to  proceed  on  the  supposition  that  the  soul  and  the  body  are 
naturally  distinct  and  separable,  and  that  the  soul  is  susceptible  of 
pain  or  pleasure  in  a  state  of  separation.  It  were  endless  to  enu- 
merate all  the  places  which  evince  this.  The  story  of  the  rich  man 
and  Lazarus,  Luke  xvi,  22,  23.  The  last  words  of  our  Lord 
upon  the  cross,  Luke  xxiii,  46,  and  of  Stephen,  when  dying. 
Paul's  doubts,  whether  he  was  in  the  body  or  out  of  the  body,  when 
he  was  translated  to  the  third  heaven  and  Paradise,  2  Cor.  xii,  2, 
3,  4.  Our  Lord's  words  to  Thomas,  to  satisfy  him  that  he  was  not 
a  spirit,  Luke  xxiv,  39.     And,  to  conclude,  the  express  mention 

Vol.  III.  25 


194  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

of  the  denial  of  spirits  as  one  of  the  errors  of  the  Sadducees.  Acts 
xxiii,  8,  For  the  Sadducees  say  there  is  no  resurrection,  neither  angel 
nor  spirit,  psSe  uyys'kov  fxsSs  m/sufjia.  All  these  are  irrefragable  evi- 
dences of  the  general  opinion  on  this  subject  of  both  Jews  and 
Christians.  By  spirit,  as  distinguished  from  angel,  is  evidently 
meant  the  departed  spirit  of  a  human  being  ;  for,  that  man  is  here, 
before  his  natural  death,  possessed  of  a  vital  and  intelligent  princi- 
ple, which  is  commonly  called  his  soul  or  spirit,  it  was  never  pre- 
tended that  they  denied."  (2) 

In  this  intermediate,  but  felicitous  and  glorious  state,  the  disem- 
bodied spirits  of  the  righteous  will  remain  in  joy  and  felicity  with 
Christ,  until  the  general  judgment ;  when  another  display  of  the 
gracious  effects  of  our  redemption,  by  Christ,  will  appear  in  the 
glorious  resurrection  of  their  bodies  to  an  immortal  life :  thus 
distinguishing  them  from  the  wicked,  whose  resurrection  will  be  to 
"  shame  and  everlasting  contempt,"  or,  to  what  may  be  emphati- 
cally termed,  an  immortal  death. 

On  this  subject  no  point  of  discussion,  of  any  importance,  arises 
among  those  who  admit  the  truth  of  Scripture,  except  as  to  the 
way  in  which  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body  is  to  be 
understood ; — whether  a  resurrection  of  the  substance  of  the  body 
be  meant,  or  of  some  minute  and  indestructible  part  of  it.  The 
latter  theory  has  been  adopted  for  the  sake  of  avoiding  certain  sup- 
posed difficulties.  It  cannot,  however,  fail  to  strike  every  impar- 
tial reader  of  the  New  Testament,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  resur- 
rection is  there  taught  without  any  nice  distinctions.  It  is  always 
exhibited  as  a  miraculous  work ;  and  represents  the  same  body 
which  is  laid  in  the  grave  as  the  subject  of  this  change  from  death 
to  life,  by  the  power  of  Christ.  Thus,  our  Lord  was  raised  in  the 
same  body  in  which  he  died,  and  his  resurrection  is  constantly  held 
forth  as  the  model  of  ours ;  and  the  apostle  Paul  expressly  says* 
"  Who  shall  change  our  vile  body,  that  it  may  be  fashioned  like 
unto  his  glorious  body."  The  only  passage  of  Scripture  which 
appears  to  favour  the  notion  of  the  rising  of  the  immortal  body  from 
some  indestructible  germ,  is  1  Cor.  xv,  35,  &c,  "  But  some  men 
will  say,  How  are  the  dead  raised  up,  and  with  what  body  do  they 
come  *?  Thou  fool,  that  which  thou  sowest  is  not  quickened  except 
it  die  ;  and  that  which  thou  sowest,  thou  sowest  not  that  body  that 
shall  be,  but  bare  grain,  it  may  chance  of  wheat,  or  of  some  other 
grain,"  &c.  If,  however,  it  had  been  the  intention  of  the  apostle, 
holding  this  view  of  the  case,  to  meet  objections  to  the  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection,  grounded  upon  the  difficulties  of  conceiving  how 

(2)  Diss,  vi,  Part  2. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  195 

the  same  body,  in  the  popular  sense,  could  be  raised  up  in  sub- 
stance, we  might  have  expected  him  to  correct  this  misapprehen- 
sion, by  declaring,  that  this  was  not  the  Christian  doctrine  ;  but 
that  some  small  parts  of  the  body  only,  bearing  as  little  proportion 
to  the  whole  as  the  germ  of  a  seed  to  the  plant,  would  be  preserved, 
and  be  unfolded  into  the  perfected  body  at  the  resurrection.  In- 
stead of  this,  he  goes  on  immediately  to  remind  the  objector  of  the 
differences  which  exist  between  material  bodies  as  they  now  exist ; 
between  the  plant  and  the  bare  or  naked  grain  ;  between  one  plant 
and  another ;  between  the  flesh  of  men,  of  beasts,  of  fishes,  and  of 
birds ;  between  celestial  and  terrestrial  bodies ;  and  between  the 
lesser  and  greater  celestial  luminaries  themselves.  Still  further  he 
proceeds  to  state  the  difference,  not  between  the  germ  of  the  body 
to  be  raised,  and  the  body  given  at  the  resurrection ;  but  between 
the  body  itself,  understood  popularly,  which  dies,  and  the  body 
which  shall  be  raised.  "  It  is  sown  in  corruption,  it  is  raised  in 
incorruption,"  which  would  not  be  true  of  the  supposed  incorrupti- 
ble and  imperishable  germ  of  this  hypothesis ;  and  can  only  be 
affirmed  of  the  body  itself,  considered  in  substance,  and  in  its 
present  state  corruptible.  Further,  the  question  put  by  the  objector, 
"  How  are  the  dead  raised  up  ]"  does  not  refer  to  the  modus  agendi 
of  the  resurrection,  or  the  process  or  manner  in  which  the  thing 
is  to  be  effected,  as  the  advocates  of  the  germ  hypothesis  appear 
to  assume.  This  is  manifest  from  the  answer  of  the  apostle,  who 
goes  on  immediately  to  state,  not  in  what  manner  the  resurrection 
is  to  be  effected,  but  what  shall  be  the  state  or  condition  of  the 
resurrection  body,  which  is  no  answer  at  all  to  the  question,  if  it  be 
taken  in  that  sense. 

The  first  of  the  two  questions  in  the  passage  referred  to  relates 
to  the  possibility  of  the  resurrection,  "  How  are  the  dead  raised 
up  ?"  the  second  to  the  kind  of  body  which  they  are  to  take,  sup- 
posing the  fact  to  be  allowed.  Both  questions,  however,  imply  a 
denial  of  the  fact,  or,  at  least,  express  a  strong  doubt  concern- 
ing it.  It  is  thus  that  tfwj  "  hoir"  in  the  first  question,  is  taken  in 
many  passages  where  it  is  connected  with  a  verb; (3)  and  the 

(3)  Gen.  xxxix,  9,  n<i>j  Twinou,  How  shall  I, — how  is  it  possible  that  I  should  do 
this  great  wickedness  ? — "  How,  then,  can  I,"  say  our  translators.'  Exod.  vi,  12, 
"  Behold,  the  children  of  Israel  have  not  hearkened  unto  me  ;  how,  then,  shall  Pha- 
raoh hear  me  ?" — nuis  uaaKovatrm  y.ov  ♦apaw  ; — how  is  it  likely,  or  possible  that  Pha- 
raoh should  hear  me?  See  also  verse  30.  Judges  xvi,  15,  "And  she  said  unto 
him,  n<Dj  Xcytis,  How  canst  thou  say  I  love  thee  ?"  2  Sam.  xi,  1 1,  may  also  be  con- 
sidered in  the  LXX.  2  Kings  x,  4,  "  But  they  were  exceedingly  afraid,  and  said, 
Behold,  two  kings  stood  not  before  him  :  *a<  ruf,  how  then  shall  we  stand  ?" — how 
is  it  possible  that  we  should  stand  ?     Job  ix,  2,  nwj  yap  torai  iucatos  Pporos ; — For 


196  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

second  question  only  expresses  the  general  negation  or  doubt  more 
particularly,  by  implying,  that  the  objector  could  not  conceive  of 
any  kind  of  body  being  restored  to  man,  which  would  not  be  an 
evil  and  imperfection  to  him.  For  the  very  reason  why  some  of 
the  Christians  of  that  age  denied,  or  strongly  doubted,  the  resur- 
rection of  the  body ;  explaining  it  figuratively,  and  saying  that  it 
was  past  already ;  was,  that  they  were  influenced  to  this  by  the 
notion  of  their  philosophical  schools,  that  the  body  was  the  prison 
of  the  soul,  and  that  the  greatest  deliverance  men  could  experience 
was  to  be  eternally  freed  from  their  connexion  with  matter.  Hence 
the  early  philosophising  sects  in  the  Christian  church,  the  Gnostics, 
Marcionites,  &c,  denied  the  resurrection,  on  the  same  ground  as 
the  philosophers,  and  thought  it  opposed  to  that  perfection  which 
they  hoped  to  enjoy  in  another  world.  Such  persons  appear  to 
have  been  in  the  church  of  Corinth  as  early  as  the  time  of  St. 
Paul,  for  that  in  this  chapter  he  answers  the  objections,  not  of  pa- 
gans, but  of  professing  Christians,  appears  from  ver.  12,  "  How  say 
some  among  you,  that  there  is  no  resurrection  of  the  dead."  The 
objection,  therefore,  in  the  minds  of  these  persons  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection,  did  not  lie  against  the  doctrine  of  the  raising  up 
of  the  substance  of  the  same  body,  so  that,  provided  this  notion 
could  be  dispensed  with,  they  were  prepared  to  admit,  that  a  new 
material  body  might  spring  from  its  germ,  as  a  plant  from  seed. 

how  shall  mortal  man  be  just  with,  or  in  the  presence  of,  God  ? — how  is  it  possible  ? 
See  what  follows ;  Psalm  lxxii,  (lxxiii,)  1 1 ;  Tlo>s  cyvia  b  Oco; ;  "  How  doth  God  know  ?" 
— how  is  it  possible  that  he  should  know  ?  See  the  connexion.  Jer.  viii,  8 ;  n<i>$  cpcire, 
"  how  do  ye  say," — how  is  it  that  ye  say, — how  can  ye  say,  We  are  wise  ? — Ibid. 
xxix,  7,  (xlvii,  7,)  FIwj  r1^»xaaci  5  "How  can  it," — the  sword  of  the  Lord, — "be 
quiet  ?" — Ezek.  xxxiii,  10,  "  If  our  transgressions  and  our  sins  be  upon  us,  and  we 
pine  away  in  them,  ttuj  tyaoptQa ;  how  should  we  then  live  ?"  Matt,  vii,  4,  "  Or 
how,  Trait,  wilt  thou  say  to  thy  brother?" — where  Rosenm.  observes  that  iru?  has 
the  force  of  negation..  Ibid,  xii,  26,  "If  Satan  cast  out  Satan,  he  is  divided  against 
himself;  jrw;  ovv  faQnaeTai,  how  shall  then," — how  can  then, — "his  kingdom  stand?" 
See  also  Luke  xi,  18. — Matt,  xxiii,  33,  "  Ye  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers,  ™s 
<pvy>ire,  how  can  ye  escape  the  damnation  of  hell?"  "qui  fieri  potest?"  Rosenm. 
Mark  iv,  40,  n«s  mc  e^rre  tcutrw  ;  "  How  is  it  that  ye  have  no  faith  ?" — Luke  i,  34, 
may  also  be  adduced.  John  v,  47,  "  If  ye  believe  not  his  writings,  to>s — hiotcvbcti  ; 
how  shall  ye," — how  can  ye, — "  believe  my  words  ?"  Romans  iii,  6,  "  God  forbid : 
for  then,  irws  xpivtt,  how  shall  God  judge  the  world  ?" — how  is  it  possible  ?  See  the 
preceding  verse.  Ibid,  viii,  32,  Titos— ^apio-erai ;  "  how  shall  he  not," — how  is  it  pos- 
sible but  that  he  should, — "  with  him  also  freely  give  us  all  things."  Ibid,  x,  14, 
Hois — zmKoKtvovrai,  "How  then  shall  they," — how  is  it  possible  that  they  should, — 
"call  on  him  in  whom  they  have  not  believed?"  &c.  1  Tim.  iii,  5,  "For  if  a  man 
know  not  how  to  rule  his  own  house,  irut,  how  shall  he  take  care  of  the  church  of 
God?"  Heb.  ii,  3,  "How  shall  we  escape," — how  is  it  possible  that  we  should 
escape, — "if  we  neglect  so  great  salvation?"  1  John  iii,  17,  nu?,  "How  dwelleth  the 
love  of  God  in  him  ?" — how  can  it  dwell?    Comp.  ch.  iv,  20,  where  Swarat  is  added.. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  197 

They  stumbled  at  the  doctrine  in  every  form,  because  it  involved 
the  circumstance  of  the  reunion  of  the  spirit  with  matter,  which 
they  thought  an  evil.  When,  therefore,  the  objector  asks,  "  How 
are  the  dead  raised  up]" (4)  he  is  to  be  understood,  not  as  inquir- 
ing as  to  the  process,  but  as  to  the  possibility.  The  doubt  may, 
indeed,  be  taken  as  an  implied  negation  of  the  possibility  of  the 
resurrection  with  reference  to  God  ;  and  then  the  apostle,  by  refer- 
ring to  the  springing  up  of  the  grain  of  corn,  when  dissolved  and 
putrified,  may  be  understood  to  show  that  the  event  was  not  incon- 
ceivable, by  referring  to  God's  omnipotence,  as  shown  in  his  daily 
providence,  which,  a  priori,  would  appear  as  marvellous  and  incre- 
dible. But  it  is  much  more  probable,  that  the  impossibility  implied 
in  this  question  refers,  not  to  the  power  of  God,  which  every 
Christian  in  the  church  at  Corinth  must  be  supposed  to  have  been 
taught  to  conceive  of  as  almighty,  and,  therefore,  adequate  to  the 
production  of  this  effect ;  but  as  relating  to  the  contrariety  which 
was  assumed  to  exist  between  the  doctrine  of  the  reunion  of  the 
soul  with  the  body,  and  those  hopes  of  a  higher  condition  in  a 
future  life,  which  both  reason  and  revelation  taught  them  to  form. 
The  second  question,  "  With  what  body  do  they  come  1"  like  the 
former,  is  a  question  not  of  inquiry,  but  of  denial,  or,  at  least,  of 
strong  doubt,  importing,  that  no  idea  could  be  entertained  by  the 
objector  of  any  material  body  being  made  the  residence  of  a  disen- 
thralled spirit,  which  could  comport  with  those  notions  of  deliver- 
ance from  the  bondage  of  corruption  by  death,  which  the  philoso- 
phy of  the  age  had  taught,  and  which  Christianity  itself  did  not 
discountenance.  The  questions,  though  different,  come,  therefore, 
nearly  to  the  same  import,  and  this  explains  why  the  apostle  chiefly 
dwells  upon  the  answer  to  the  latter  only,  by  which,  in  fact,  he 
replies  to  both.  The  grain  cast  into  the  earth  even  dies  and  is  cor- 
rupted, and  that  which  is  sown  is  not  "  the  body  which  shall  be," 
in  form  and  quality,  but  "  naked  grain ;"  yet  into  the  plant,  in  its 
perfect  form,  is  the  same  matter  transformed.  So  the  flesh  of 
beasts,  birds,  fishes,  and  man,  is  the  same  matter,  though  exhibiting 
different  qualities.  So  also  bodies  celestial  are  of  the  same  matter 
as  "  bodies  terrestrial ;"  and  the  more  splendid  luminaries  of  the 
heavens  are,  in  substance,  the  same  as  those  of  inferior  glory.  It 
is  thus  that  the  apostle  reaches  his  conclusion,  and  shows,  that  the 
doctrine  of  our  reunion  with  the  body  implies  in  it  no  imperfection 
— nothing  contrary  to  the  hopes  of  liberation  "  from  the  burthen  of 
this  flesh ;"  because  of  the  high  and  glorified  qualities  which  God 

(4)  The  present  indicative  verb  is  here  used,  as  it  is  generally  throughout  this 
chapter,  for  the  future. 

25* 


198  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

is  able  to  give  to  matter ;  of  which  the  superior  purity,  splendour, 
and  energy  of  some  material  things  in  this  world,  in  comparison  of 
others,  is  a  visible  demonstration.  For  after  he  has  given  these 
instances,  he  adds,  "  So  is  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  ;  it  is  sown 
in  corruption,  it  is  raised  in  incorruption  ;  it  is  sown  in  dishonour, 
it  is  raised  in  glory ;  it  is  sown  in  weakness,  it  is  raised  in  power  ; 
it  is  sown  a  natural  (an  animal)  body  ;  it  is  raised  a  spiritual  body," 
so  called,  "  as  being  accommodated  to  a  spirit,  and  far  excelling 
all  that  is  required  for  the  transaction  of  earthly  and  terrene 
affairs  ;"(5)  and  so  intent  is  the  apostle  on  dissipating  all  those 
gross  representations  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body  which  the 
objectors  had  assumed  as  the  ground  of  their  opposition,  and  which 
they  had,  probably,  in  their  disputations,  placed  under  the  strongest 
views,  that  he  guards  the  true  Christian  doctrine,  on  this  point,  in 
the  most  explicit  manner,  "  Now  this  I  say,  brethren,  that  flesh  and 
blood  cannot  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God,  neither  doth  corruption 
inherit  incorruption ;"  and,  therefore,  let  no  man  henceforward 
affirm,  or  assume  it  in  his  argument,  that  we  teach  any  such  doc- 
trine. This,  also,  he  strengthens  by  showing,  that  as  to  the  saints 
who  are  alive  at  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  they  also  shall  be  in 
like  manner  "changed-,"  and  that  "tins  corruptible,"  as  to  them 
also,  "  shall  put  on  incorruption." 

Thus,  in  the  argument,  the  apostle  confines  himself  wholly  to  the 
possibility  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body  in  a  refined  and  glorified 
state  ;  but  omits  all  reference  to  the  mode  in  which  the  thing  will 
be  effected,  as  being  out  of  the  line  of  the  objector's  questions,  and 
in  itself  above  human  thought,  and  wholly  miraculous.  It  is,  how- 
ever, clear,  that  when  he  speaks  of  the  body,  as  the  subject  of  this 
wondrous  "  change,"  he  speaks  of  it  popularly,  as  the  same  body 
in  substance,  whatever  changes  in  its  qualities  or  figure  may  be  im- 
pressed upon  it.  Great  general  changes  it  will  experience,  as  from 
corruption  to  incorruption,  from  mortality  to  immortality ;  great 
changes  of  a  particular  kind  will  also  take  place,  as  its  being  freed 
from  deformities  and  defects,  and  the  accidental  varieties  produced 
by  climate,  aliments,  labour,  and  hereditary  diseases.  It  is  also 
laid  down  by  our  Lord,  that  "  in  the  resurrection  they  shall  neither 
marry  nor  be  given  in  marriage,  but  be  like  to  the  angels  of  God ;" 
and  this  also  implies  a  certain  change  of  structure  ;  and  we  may 
gather  from  the  declaration  of  the  apostle,  that  though  "  the  sto- 
mach" is  now  adapted  "  to  meats,  and  meats  to  the  stomach,  God 
will  destroy  both  it  and  them ;"  that  the  animal  appetite  for  food 

(5)    R.OSENMULLER. 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  199 

will  be  removed,  and  the  organ  now  adapted  to  that  appetite  have 
no  place  in  the  renewed  frame.  But  great  as  these  changes  are, 
the  human  form  will  be  retained  in  its  perfection,  after  the  model 
of  our  Lord's  "  glorious  body,"  and  the  substance  of  the  matter  of 
which  it  is  composed  will  not  thereby  be  affected.  That  the  same 
body  which  was  laid  in  the  grave  shall  arise  out  of  it,  is  the  mani- 
fest doctrine  of  the  Scriptures. 

The  notion  of  an  incorruptible  germ,  or  that  of  an  original  and 
unchangeable  stamen,  out  of  which  a  new  and  glorious  body,  at  the 
resurrection,  is  to  spring,  appears  to  have  been  borrowed  from  the 
speculations  of  some  of  the  Jewish  Rabbins,  who  speak  of  some 
such  supposed  part  in  the  human  frame,  under  the  name  luz,  to 
which  they  ascribe  marvellous  properties,  and  from  which  the  body 
was  to  arise.  No  allusion  is,  however,  made  to  any  such  opinion 
by  the  early  fathers,  in  their  defences  of  the  doctrine  of  the  resur- 
rection from  the  dead.  On  the  contrary,  they  argue  in  such  a 
way,  as  to  prove  the  possibility  of  the  reunion  of  the  scattered  parts 
of  the  body ;  Avhich  sufficiently  shows  that  the  germ  theory  had 
not  been  resorted  to,  by  Christian  divines  at  least,  in  order  to 
harmonize  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  with  philosophy.  So 
Justin  Martyr,  in  a  fragment  of  his  concerning  the  resurrection, 
expressly  answers  the  objection,  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  flesh, 
after  a  corruption  and  perfect  dissolution  of  all  its  parts,  should  be 
united  together  again,  and  contends,  "  that  if  the  body  be  not 
raised  complete,  with  all  its  integral  parts,  it  would  argue  a  want 
of  power  in  God ;"  and  although  some  of  the  Jews  adopted  the 
notion  of  the  germinating  or  springing  up  of  the  body  from  some 
one  indestructible  part,  yet  the  most  orthodox  of  their  Rabbies  con- 
tended for  the  resurrection  of  the  same  body.  So  Maimonides 
says,  "  Men,  in  the  same  manner  as  they  before  lived,  with  the 
same  body  shall  be  restored  to  life  by  God,  and  sent  into  this  life 
with  the  same  identity  :"  and  "  that  nothing  can  properly  be  called 
a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  but  the  return  of  the  very  same  soul, 
into  the  very  same  body  from  which  it  was  separated." (6) 

This  theory,  under  its  various  forms,  and  whether  adopted  by 
Jews  or  Christians,  was  designed,  doubtless,  to  render  the  doctrine 
of  a  resurrection  from  the  dead  less  difficult  to  conceive,  and  more 
acceptable  to  philosophic  minds ;  but,  Hive  most  other  attempts  of 
the  same  kind  to  bring  down  the  supernatural  doctrines  of  revela- 
tion to  the  level  of  our  conceptions,  it  escapes  none  of  the  original 
difficulties,  and  involves  itself  in  others  far  more  perplexing. 

(6)  Itambam  apud  Pocockium  in  Notis  Miscellan.  Port.  Mos.  p.  125. 


200  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

For  if  by  this  hypothesis  it  was  designed  to  remove  the  difficulty 
of  conceiving  how  the  scattered  parts  of  one  body  could  be  pre- 
served from  becoming  integral  parts  of  other  bodies,  it  supposes 
that  the  constant  care  of  Providence  is  exerted  to  maintain  the  in- 
corruptibility of  those  individual  germs,  or  stamina,  so  as  to  prevent 
their  assimilation  with  each  other.  Now,  if  they  have  this  by  ori- 
ginal quality,  then  the  same  quality  may  just  as  easily  be  supposed 
to  appertain  to  every  particle  which  composes  a  human  body  ;  so 
that  though  it  be  used  for  food,  it  shall  not  be  capable  of  assimila- 
tion, in  any  circumstances,  with  another  human  body.  But  if  these 
germs,  or  stamina,  have  not  this  quality  by  their  original  nature, 
they  can  only  be  prevented  from  assimilating  Avith  each  other  by 
that  operation  of  God  which  is  present  to  all  his  works,  and  which 
must  always  be  directed  to  secure  the  execution  of  his  own  ultimate 
designs.  If  this  view  be  adopted,  then,  if  the  resort  must  at  last  be 
to  the  superintendence  of  a  Being  of  infinite  power  and  wisdom, 
there  is  no  greater  difficulty  in  supposing  that  his  care  to  secure 
this  object  shall  extend  to  a  million  than  to  a  thousand  particles  of 
matter.  This  is,  in  fact,  the  true  and  rational  answer  to  the  objec- 
tion that  the  same  piece  of  matter  may  happen  to  be  a  part  of  two 
or  more  bodies,  as  in  the  instances  of  men  feeding  upon  animals 
which  have  fed  upon  men,  and  of  men  feeding  upon  one  another. 
The  question  here  is  one  which  simply  respects  the  frustrating  a 
linal  purpose  of  the  Almighty  by  an  operation  of  nature.  To  sup- 
pose that  he  cannot  prevent  this,  is  to  deny  his  power ;  to  suppose 
him  inattentive  to  it,  is  to  suppose  him  indifferent  to  his  own 
designs ;  and  to  assume  that  he  employs  care  to  prevent  it,  is  to 
assume  nothing  greater,  nothing  in  fact  so  great,  as  many  instances 
of  control,  which  are  always  occurring  ;  as,  for  instance,  the  regu- 
lation of  the  proportion  of  the  sexes  in  human  births,  which  cannot 
be  attributed  to  chance,  but  must  either  be  referred  to  superin- 
tendence, or  to  some  original  law. 

Thus  these  theories  afford  no  relief  to  the  only  real  difficulty 
involved  in  the  doctrine,  but  leave  the  whole  case  still  to  be  resolved 
into  the  almighty  power  of  God.  But  they  involve  themselves  in 
the  fatal  objection,  that  they  are  plainly  in  opposition  to  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Scriptures.     For, 

1.  There  is  no  resurrection  of  the  body  on  this  hypothesis,  be- 
cause the  germ,  or  stamina,  can  in  no  good  sense  be  called  "  the 
body."  If  a  finger,  or  even  a  limb,  is  not  the  body,  much  less  can 
these  minuter  parts  be  entitled  to  this  appellation. 

2.  There  is,  on  these  theories,  no  resurrection  at  all.  For  if 
the  preserved  part  be  a  germ,  and  the  analogy  of  germination  be 


SECOND.]  THEOLOGICAL    INSTITUTES.  201 

adopted  ;  then  we  have  no  longer  a  resurrection  from  death,  but  a 
vegetation  from  a  suspended  principle  of  secret  life.  If  the  stamina 
of  Leibnitz  be  contended  for,  then  the  body,  into  which  the  soul 
enters  at  the  resurrection,  with  the  exception  of  these  minute 
stamina,  is  pi'ovicled  for  it  by  the  addition  and  aggregation  of  new 
matter,  and  we  have  a  creation,  not  a  resurrection. 

3.  If  bodies  in  either  of  these  modes,  are  to  be  framed  for  the 
soul,  by  the  addition  of  a  large  mass  of  new  matter,  the  resurrec- 
tion is  made  substantially  the  same  with  the  pagan  notion  of  the 
metempsychosis  ;  and  if  St.  Paul,  at  Athens,  preached,  not  "  Jesus 
and  the  resurrection,"  but  Jesus  and  a  transmigration  into  a  new 
body,  it  will  be  difficult  to  account  for  his  hearers  scoffing  at  a 
doctrine  which  had  received  the  sanction  of  several  of  their  own 
philosophic  authorities. 

Another  objection  to  the  resurrection  of  the  body  has  been 
drawn  from  the  changes  of  its  substance  during  life.  The  answer 
to  this  is,  that  allowing  a  frequent  and  total  change  of  the  sub- 
stance of  the  body  (which,  however,  is  but  an  hypothesis)  to  take 
place,  it  affects  not  the  doctrine  of  Scripture,  which  is,  that  the 
body  which  is  laid  in  the  grave  shall  be  raised  up.  But  then,  we 
are  told,  that  if  our  bodies  have  in  fact  undergone  successive 
changes  during  life,  the  bodies  in  which  we  have  sinned  or  per- 
formed rewardable  actions,  may  not  be,  in  many  instances,  the 
same  bodies  as  those  which  will  be  actually  rewarded  or  punished. 
We  answer,  that  rewards  and  punishments  have  their  relation  to 
the  body,  not  so  much  as  it  is  the  subject  but  the  instrument  of 
reward  and  punishment.  It  is  the  soul  only  which  perceives  pain 
or  pleasure,  which  suffers  or  enjoys,  and  is,  therefore,  the  only 
rewardable  subject.  Were  we,  therefore,  to  admit  such  corporeal 
mutations  as  are  assumed  in  this  objection,  they  affect  not  the  case 
of  our  accountability.  .  The  personal  identity  or  sameness  of  a  ra- 
tional being,  as  Mr.  Locke  has  observed,  consists  in  self  conscious- 
ness :  "  By  this  every  one  is  to  himself  what  he  calls  self,  without 
considering  whether  that  self  be  continued  in  the  same  or  divers 
substances.  It  was  by  the  same  self  which  reflects  on  an  action 
done  many  years  ago,  that  the  action  was  performed."  If  there 
were  indeed  any  weight  in  this  objection,  it  would  affect  the  pro- 
ceedings of  human  criminal  courts  in  all  cases  of  offences  commit- 
ted at  some  distance  of  time  ;  but  it  contradicts  the  common  sense, 
because  it  contradicts  the  common  consciousness  and  experience 
of  mankind. 

END  OF  THE  SECOND  PART. 


PART   THIRD. 

THE  MORALS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

CHAPTER  I. 
The  Moral  Law. 

Of  the  Law  of  God,  as  the  subject  of  a  Divine  and  adequately 
authenticated  revelation,  some  observations  were  made  in  the  first 
part  of  this  work.  That  such  a  law  exists,  so  communicated  to 
mankind,  and  contained  in  the  Holy  Scriptures ; — that  we  are 
under  obligation  to  obey  it  as  the  declared  will  of  our  Creator  and 
Lord ; — that  this  obligation  is  grounded  upon  our  natural  relation 
to  him  as  creatures  made  by  his  power,  and  dependent  upon  his 
bounty,  are  points  which  need  not,  therefore,  be  again  adverted  to, 
nor  is  it  necessary  to  dwell  upon  the  circumstances  and  degrees  of 
its  manifestation  to  men,  under  those  former  dispensations  of  the 
true  religion  which  preceded  Christianity.  We  have  exhibited  the 
leading  doctrines  of  the  Scriptures,  as  they  are  found  in  that  per- 
fected system  of  revealed  religion,  which  we  owe  to  our  Saviour, 
and  to  his  apostles,  who  wrote 'under  the  inspiration  of  that  Holy 
Spirit  whom  he  sent  forth  "  to  lead  them  into  all  truth ;"  and  we 
shall  now  find  in  the  discourses  of  our  Lord,  and  in  the  apostolical 
writings,  a  system  of  moral  principles,  virtues,  and  duties,  equalling 
in  fulness  and  perfection  that  great  body  of  doctrinal  truth 
which  is  contained  in  the  New  Testament ;  and  deriving  from  it 
its  vital  influence  and  efficacy. 

It  is,  however,  to  be  noticed,  that  the  Morals  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment are  not  proposed  to  us  in  the  form  of  a  regular  code.  Even 
in  the  books  of  Moses,  which  have  the  legislative  form  to  a  great 
extent,  all  the  principles  and  duties  which  constituted  the  full 
character  of  "  godliness,"  under  that  dispensation,  are  not  made 
the  subjects  of  formal  injunction  by  particular  precepts.  They 
are  partly  infolded  in  general  principles,  or  often  take  the  form  of 
injunction  in  an  apparently  incidental  manner,  or  arc  matters  of 


204  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

obvious  inference.  A  preceding  code  of  traditionary  moral  law  is 
also  all  along  supposed  in  the  writings  of  Moses  and  the  prophets, 
as  well  as  a  consuetudinary  ritual  and  a  doctrinal  theology  ;  both 
transmitted  from  the  patriarchs.  This,  too,  is  eminently  the  case 
with  Christianity.  It  supposes  that  all  who  believed  in  Christ 
admitted  the  Divine  authority  of  the  Old  Testament ;  and  it  assumes 
the  perpetual  authority  of  its  morals,  as  well  as  the  truth  of  its  fun- 
damental theology.  The  constant  allusions  in  the  New  Testament 
to  the  moral  rules  of  the  Jews  and  patriarchs,  either  expressly  as 
precepts,  or  as  the  data  of  argument,  sufficiently  guard  us  against 
the  notion,  that  what  has  not  in  so  many  words  been  re-enacted  by 
Christ  and  his  apostles  is  of  no  authority  among  Christians.  In  a 
great  number  of  instances,  however,  the  form  is  directly  preceptive, 
so  as  to  have  all  the  explicitness  and  force  of  a  regular  code  of" 
law  ;  and  is,  as  much  as  a  regular  code  could  be,  a  declaration  ol 
the  sovereign  will  of  Christ,  enforced  by  the  sanctions  of  eternal 
life  and  death. 

This,  however,  is  a  point  on  which  a  few  confirmatory  observa- 
tions may  be  usefully  adduced. 

No  part  of  the  preceding  dispensation,  designated  generally  by 
the  appellation  of  "  the  law,"  is  repealed  in  the  New  Testament, 
but  what  is  obviously  ceremonial,  typical,  and  incapable  of  coexist- 
ing with  Christianity.  Our  Lord,  in  his  discourse  with  the  Samari- 
tan woman,  declares,  that  the  hour  of  the  abolition  of  the  temple 
worship  was  come ;  the  Apostle  Paul,  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
teaches  us  that  the  Levitical  services  were  but  shadows,  the  sub- 
stance and  end  of  which  is  Christ ;  and  the  ancient  visible  church, 
as  constituted  upon  the  ground  of  natural  descent  from  Abraham, 
was  abolished  by  the  establishment  of  a  spiritual  body  of  believers 
to  take  its  place. 

No  precepts  of  a  purely  political  nature,  that  is,  which  respect 
the  civil  subjection  of  the  Jews  to  their  theocracy,  are,  therefore, 
of  any  force  to  us  as  laws,  although  they  may  have,  in  many  cases, 
the  greatest  authority  as  principles.  No  ceremonial  precepts  can 
be  binding,  since  they  were  restrained  to  a  period  terminating  with 
the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ ;  nor  are  even  the  patriarchal 
rites  of  circumcision  and  the  passover  obligatory  upon  Christians, 
since  we  have  sufficient  evidence,  that  they  were  of  an  adumbra- 
tive character,  and  were  laid  aside  by  the  first  inspired  teachers  of 
Christianity. 

With  the  moral  precepts  which  abound  in  the  Old  Testament 
the  case  is  very  different,  as  sufficiently  appears  from  the  different 
and  even  contrary  manner  in  which  they  are  always  spoken  of  by 


tfHIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  205 

Christ  and  his  apostles.  When  our  Lord,  in  his  sermon  on  the 
mount,  says,  "  Think  not  that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  law  or  the 
prophets ;  I  am  not  come  to  destroy  the  law ;  but  to  fulfil ;"  that 
is,  to  confirm  or  establish  it : — the  entire  scope  of  his  discourse 
shows,  that  he  is  speaking  exclusively  of  the  moral  precepts  of  the 
law,  eminently  so  called,  and  of  the  moral  injunctions  of  the  pro- 
phets founded  upon  them,  and  to  which  he  thus  gives  an  equal 
authority.  And  in  so  solemn  a  manner  does  he  enforce  this,  that 
he  adds,  doubtless  as  foreseeing  that  attempts  would  be  made  by 
deceiving  or  deceived  men  professing  his  religion  to  lessen  the 
authority  of  the  moral  law, — "  Whosoever,  therefore,  shall  break 
one  of  these  least  commandments,  and  shall  teach  men  so,  he  shall 
be  called  the  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven;"  that  is,  as  St, 
Chrysostom  interprets,  "he  shall  be  the  farthest  from  attaining 
heaven  and  happiness,  which  imports  that  he  shall  not  attain 
it  at  all." 

In  like  manner  St.  Paul,  after  having  strenuously  maintained  the 
doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone,  anticipates  an  objection  by 
asking,  "  Do  we  then  make  void  the  law  through  faith?'  and  sub- 
joins, "  God  forbid,  yea  we  establish  the  law :"  meaning  by  "  the 
law,"  as  the  context  and  his  argument  shows,  the  moral  and  not 
the  ceremonial  law. 

After  such  declarations  it  is  worse  than  trifling  for  any  to  con^ 
tend,  that,  in  order  to  establish  the  authority  of  the  moral  law  of 
the  Jews  over  Christians,  it  ought  to  have  been  formally  re-enacted. 
To  this,  however,  we  may  further  reply,  not  only  that  many  import- 
ant moral  principles  and  rules  found  in  the  Old  Testament  were 
never  formally  enacted  among  the  Jews,  were  traditional  from  an 
earlier  age,  and  received  at  different  times  the  more  indirect  author 
ity  of  inspired  recognition ;  but,  to  put  the  matter  in  a  stronger 
light,  that  all  the  leading  moral  precepts  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures 
are,  in  point  of  fact,  proposed  in  a  manner  which  has  the  full  force 
of  formal  re-enactment,  as  the  laws  of  the  Christian  church.-  This 
argument,  from  the  want  of  formal  re-enactment,  has  therefore  no 
Aveight.  The  summary  of  the  law  and  the  prophets,  which  is  to 
love  God  with  all  our  heart,  and  to  serve  him  with  all  our  strength, 
and  to  love  our  neighbour  as  ourselves,  is  unquestionably  enjoined, 
and  even  re-enacted  by  the  Christian  Lawgiver.  When  our  Lord 
is  explicitly  asked  by  "  one  who  came  unto  him  and  said,  Good 
Master,  what  good  thing  shall  I  do,  that  I  may  have  eternal  life  1" 
The  answer  given  shows  that  the  moral  law  contained  in  the  Deca- 
logue is  so  in  force  under  the  Christian  dispensation,  that  obedience 
ro  it  is  necessary  to  final  salvation : — "  If  thou  wilt  enter  into  life, 

Vol.  III.  2(5 


206  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

keep  the  commandments."  And  that  nothing  ceremonial  is  intended 
by  this  term  is  manifest  from  what  follows.    "  He  saith  unto  him? 
Which  1    Jesus  said,  Thou  shalt  do  no  murder.    Thou  shalt  not 
commit  adultery.     Thou  shalt  not  steal,"  &c,  Matt,  xix,  17-19. 
Here,  also,  we  have  all  the  force  of  a  formal  re-enactment  of  the 
Decalogue,  a  part  of  it  heing  evidently  put  for  the  whole.     Nor 
were  it  difficult  to  produce  passages  from  the  discourses  of  Christ 
and  the  writings  of  the  apostles,  which  enjoin  all  the  precepts  of 
this  law  taken  separately,  by  their  authority,  as  indispensable  parts 
of  Christian  duty,  and  that,  too,  under  their  original  sanctions  of 
life  and  death  :  so  that  the  two  circumstances  which  form  the  true 
character  of  a  law  in  its  highest  sense,  divine  authority  and 
penal  sanctions,  are  found  as  truly  in  the  New  Testament  as  in 
the  Old.     It  will  not,  for  instance,  be  contended,  that  the  New 
Testament  does  not  enjoin  the  acknoAvledgment  and  worship  of 
one  God  alone  ;  nor  that  it  does  not  prohibit  idolatry ;  nor  that  it 
does  not  level  its  maledictions  against  false  and  profane  swearing  ; 
nor  that  the  Apostle  Paul  does  not  use  the  very  words  of  the  fifth 
commandment  preceptively  when  he  says,  Eph.  vi,  2,  "  Honour 
thy  father  and  mother,  which  is  the  first  commandment  with  pro- 
mise ;"  nor  that  murder,  adultery,  theft,  false  witness,  and  covet- 
ousness,  are  not  all  prohibited  under  pain  of  exclusion  from  the 
kingdom  of  God.     Thus,  then,  we  have  the  whole  Decalogue 
brought  into  the  Christian  code  of  morals  by  a  distinct  injunction 
of  its  separate  precepts,  and  by  their  recognition  as  of  permanent 
and  unchangeable  obligation  :  the  fourth  commandment,  respect- 
ing the  Sabbath  only,  being  so  far  excepted,  that  its  injunction  i< 
not  so  expressly  marked.    This,  however,  is  no  exception  in  fact : 
for  besides  that  its  original  place  in  the  two  tables  sufficiently  dis- 
tinguishes it  from  all  positive,  ceremonial,  and  typical  precepts, 
and  gives  it  a  moral  character,  in  respect  of  its  ends,  which  are, 
first,  mercy  to  servants  and  cattle,  and,  second,  the  worship  of 
Almighty  God,  undisturbed  by  worldly  interruptions  and  cares,  it 
is  necessarily  included  in  that  "  law"  which  our  Lord  declares  he 
came  not  to  destroy,  or  abrogate ;  in  that  "  law"  which  St.  Paul 
declares  to  be  "  established  by  faith,"  and  among  those  "  com- 
mandments" which  our  Lord  declares  must  be  "  kept,"  if  any  one 
would  "  enter  into  life."    To  this,  also,  the  practice  of  the  apostles 
is  to  be  added,  who  did  not  cease  themselves  from  keeping  one  day 
in  seven  holy,  nor  teach  others  so  to  do ;  but  gave  to  "  the  Lord's 
day"  that  eminence  and  sanctity  in  the  Christian  church  which 
the  seventh  day  had  in  the  Jewish,  by  consecrating  it  to  holy  uses : 
an  alteration  not  affecting  the  precept  at  all,  except  in  an  lines- 


i'l-URD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  20*< 

sential  circumstance,  (if  indeed  in  that,)  and  in  which  wc  may 
suppose  them  to  act  under  Divine  suggestion. 

Thus,  then,  we  have  the  obligation  of  the  whole  Decalogue  as 
fully  established  in  the  New  Testament  as  in  the  Old  as  if  it  had 
been  formally  re-enacted  ;  and  that  no  formal  re-enactment  of  it 
took  place,  is  itself  a  presumptive  proof  that  it  was  never  regarded 
by  the  Lawgiver  as  temporary,  which  the  formality  of  republication 
might  have  supposed. 

It  is  important  to  remark,  however,  that,  although  the  moral  laws 
of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  pass  into  the  Christian  code,  they  stand 
there  in  other  and  higher  circumstances  ;  so  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  a  more  perfect  dispensation  of  the  knowledge  of  the  moral 
will  of  God  than  the  Old.     In  particular, 

1.  They  are  more  expressly  extended  to  the  heart,  as  by  our 
Lord,  in  his  sermon  on  the  mount ;  who  teaches  us  that  the  thought 
and  inward  purpose  of  any  offence  is  a  violation  of  the  law  pro- 
hibiting its  external  and  visible  commission. 

2.  The  principles  on  which  they  are  founded  are  carried  out  in 
the  New  Testament  into  a  greater  variety  of  duties,  which,  by 
embracing  more  perfectly  the  social  and  civil  relations  of  life,  are 
of  a  more  universal  character. 

3.  There  is  a  much  more  enlarged  injunction  of  positive  and 
particular  virtues,  especially  those  which  constitute  the  Christian 
temper. 

4.  By  all  overt  acts  being  inseparably  connected  with  corres- 
ponding principles  in  the  heart,  in  order  to  constitute  acceptable 
obedience,  which  principles  suppose  the  regeneration  of  the  soul 
by  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  moral  renovation  is,  therefore,  held  out 
as  necessary  to  our  salvation,  and  promised  as  a  part  of  the  grace 
of  our  redemption  by  Christ. 

5.  By  being  connected  with  promises  of  Divine  assistance,  which 
is  peculiar  to  a  law  connected  with  evangelical  provisions. 

6.  By  their  having  a  living  illustration  in  the  perfect  and  practi- 
cal example  of  Christ. 

7.  By  the  higher  sanctions  derived  from  the  clearer  revelation 
of  a  future  state,  and  the  more  explicit  promises  of  eternal  life,  and 
threatenings  of  eternal  punishment. 

It  follows  from  this,  that  we  have  in  the  Gospel  the  most  com- 
plete and  perfect  revelation  of  moral  law  ever  given  to  men  ;  and  a 
more  exact  manifestation  of  the  brightness,  perfection,  and  glory 
of  that  law,  under  which  angels  and  our  progenitors  in  Paradise 
were  placed,  and  which  it  is  at  once  the  delight  and  interest  of  the 
most  perfect  and  happy  beings  to  obey. 


208  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES,  [PART 

It  has,  however,  fared  with  morals  as  with  doctrines,  that  they 
have  been  often,  and  by  a  strange  perversity,  studied,  without  any 
reference  to  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures.  As  we  have  had  sys- 
tems of  natural  religion  drawn  out  of  the  materials  furnished 
by  the  Scriptures,  and  then  placed  to  the  sole  account  of  human 
reason ;  so  we  have  also  various  systems  of  morals  drawn,  as  far 
as  the  authors  thought  fit,  from  the  same  source,  and  put  forth 
under  the  title  of  moral  philosophy,  implying  too  often,  or,  at 
least,  sanctioning  the  inference,  that  the  unassisted  powers  of  man 
are  equally  adequate  to  the  discovery  of  doctrine  and  duty ;  or,  at 
best,  that  Christianity  but  perfects  what  uninspired  men  are  able  not 
only  to  commence,  but  to  carry  onward  to  a  considerable  approach 
to  perfection.  This  observation  may  be  made  as  to  both — -that 
whatever  is  found  correct  in  doctrine,  and  pure  in  morals  in  an- 
cient writers  or  systems,  may  be  traced  to  indirect  revelation  ;  and 
that  so  far  as  mere  reason  has  applied  itself  to  discovery  in  either, 
it  has  generally  gone  astray.  The  modern  systems  of  natural 
religion  and  ethics  are  superior  to  the  ancient,  not  because  the 
reason  of  their  framers  is  superior,  but  because  they  have  had  the 
advantage  of  a  light  from  Christianity,  which  they  have  not  been 
candid  enough  generally  to  acknowledge.  For  those  who  have 
written  on  such  subjects  with  a  view  to  lower  the  value  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  the  remarks  in  the  first  part  of  this  work  must 
suffice  ;  but  of  that  class  of  moral  philosophers,  who  hold  the  au- 
thority of  the  Sacred  Books,  and  yet  sedulously  omit  all  reference 
to  them,  it  may  be  inquired  what  they  propose,  by  disjoining  mo- 
rals from  Christianity,  and  considering  them  as  a  separate  science  'i 
Authority  they  cannot  gain,  for  no  obligation  to  duty  can  be  so 
high  as  the  command  of  God  ;  nor  can  that  authority  be  applied 
in  so  direct  a  manner,  as  by  a  revelation  of  his  will :  and  as  for  the 
perfection  of  their  system,  since  they  discover  no  duties  not  already 
enjoined  in  the  Scriptures,  or  grounded  upon  some  general  prin- 
ciples they  contain,  they  can  find  no  apology,  from  the  additions 
they  make  to  our  moral  knowledge,  to  put  Christianity,  on  all 
such  subjects,  wholly  out  of  sight. 

All  attempts  to  teach  morals,  independent  of  Christianity,  even 
by  those  who  receive  it  as  a  Divine  revelation,  must,  notwithstand- 
ing the  great  names  which  have  sanctioned  the  practice,  be  con- 
sidered as  of  mischievous  tendency,  although  the  design  may  have 
been  laudable,  and  the  labour,  in  some  subordinate  respects,  not 
without  utility  : 

1 .  Because  they  silently  convey  the  impression,  that  human  rea- 
son, without  assistance,  is  sufficient  to  discover  the  full  duty  of  man 
towards  God  and  towards  his  fellow  creatures, 


JIIIRD.j  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  209 

2.  Because  they  imply  a  deficiency  in  the  moral  code  of  our 
yeligion,  which  does  not  exist ;  the  fact  being  that,  although  these 
systems  borrow  much  from  Christianity,  they  do  not  take  in  the 
whole  of  its  moral  principles,  and,  therefore,  so  far  as  they  are 
accepted,  as  substitutes,  displace  what  is  perfect  for  what  is 
imperfect. 

3.  Because  they  turn  the  attention  from  what  is  fact,  the  re- 
vealed law  of  God,  with  its  appropriate  sanctions,  and  place  the 
obligation  to  obedience  either  on  fitness,  beauty,  general  interest, 
or  the  natural  authority  of  truth,  which  are  all  matters  of  opinion  ; 
or,  if  they  ultimately  refer  it  to  the  will  of  God,  yet  they  infer -thai 
will  through  various  reasonings  and  speculations,  which  in  them- 
selves are  still  matters  of  opinion,  and  as  to  which  men  will  feel 
themselves  to  be  in  some  degree  free. 

4.  The  duties  they  enjoin  are  either  merely  outward  in  the  act. 
and  so  they  disconnect  them  from  internal  principles  and  habits, 
without  which  they  are  not  acceptable  to  God,  and  but  the  shadows 
of  real  virtue,  however  beneficial  they  may  be  to  men ;  or  else 
they  assume  that  human  nature  is  able  to  engraft  those  principles 
and  habits  upon  itself,  and  to  practise  them  without  abatement  and 
interruption  ;  a  notion  which  is  contradicted  by  those  very  Scrip- 
tures they  hold  to  be  of  Divine  authority. 

5.  Their  separation  of  the  doctrines  oi  religion  from  its  morals, 
leads  to  an  entirely  different  process  of  promoting  morality  among 
men  to  that  which  the  infinite  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God  has 
established  in  the  Gospel.  They  lay  down  the  rule  of  conduct, 
and  recommend  it  from  its  excellence  per  se,  or  its  influence  upon 
individuals  and  upon  society,  or  perhaps  because  it  is  manifested  to 
be  the  will  of  the  Supreme  Being,  indicated  from  the  constitution 
of  human  nature,  and  the  relations  of  men.  But  Christianity 
rigidly  connects  its  doctrines  with  its  morals.  Its  doctrine  of  man's 
moral  weakness  is  made  use  of  to  lead  him  to  distrust  his  own 
sufficiency ;  its  doctrine  of  the  atonement  shows  at  once  the  infi- 
nite evil  of  sin,  and  encourages  men  to  seek  deliverance  from  its 
power.  Its  doctrine  of  regeneration  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  implies  the  entire  destruction  of  the  love  of  evil,  and  the 
direction  of  the  whole  affection  of  the  soul  to  universal  virtue.  Its 
doctrine  of  prayer  opens  to  man  a  fellowship  with  God,  invigorat- 
ing to  every  virtue.  The  example  of  Christ,  the  imitation  of  which 
is  made  obligatory  upon  us,  is  in  itself  a  moral  system  in  action, 
and  in  principle ;  and  the  revelation  of  a  future  judgment  brings 
ihe  whole  weight  of  the  control  of  future  rewards  and  punishments 
to  bear  upon  the  motives  and  actions  of  men,  and  is  the  source  ol 

26* 


MO  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

that  fear  of  offending  God  which  is  the  constant  guard  of  virtue, 
when  human  motives  would  in  a  multitude  of  cases  avail  nothing. 

It  may  indeed  be  asked,  whether  the  teaching  of  morals  must 
tfien  in  all  cases  be  kept  in  connexion  with  religion  1  and  whether 
(he  philosophy  of  virtues  and  of  vices,  with  the  lower  motives  by 
which  they  are  urged  upon  men,  may  not  be  usefully  investigated  1 
We  answer,  that  if  the  end  proposed  by  this  is  not  altogether  spe- 
culative, but  something  practical ;  if  the  case  of  an  immoral  world 
is  taken  up  by  moralists  with  reference  to  its  cure,  or  even  to  its 
emendation  in  any  effectual  degree,  the  whole  is  then  resolved  into 
this,  simple  question, — whether  a  weaker  instrument  shall  be  pre- 
ferred to  that  which  is  powerful  and  effective  1  Certain  it  is  that 
die  great  end  of  Christianity,  so  far  as  its  influence  upon  society 
goes,  is  to  moralize  mankind ;  but  its  infinitely  wise  Author  ha? 
established  and  authorized  but  one  process  for  the  correction  of  the 
practical  evils  of  the  world,  and  that  is,  the  teaching  and  enforce- 
ment of  the  whole  truth  as  it  stands  in  his  own  Revelations  ; 
and  to  this  only  has  he  promised  his  special  blessing.  A  distinct 
class  of  ethical  Teachers,  imitating  heathen  philosophers  in  the 
principles  and  modes  of  moral  tuition,  is,  in  a  Christian  country, 
a  violent  anomaly  ;  and  implies  an  absurd  return  to  the  twilight  oi 
knowledge  after  the  sun  itself  has  arisen  upon  the  world. 

Within  proper  guards,  and  in  strict  connexion  with  the  whoh 
Christian  system,  what  is  called  Moral  Philosophy  is  not,  however. 
to  be  undervalued  ;  and  from  many  of  the  writers  above  alluded  to 
much  useful  instruction  may  be  collected,  which,  though  of  but  little 
efficacy  in  itself,  may  be  invigorated  by  uniting  it  with  the  vital 
and  energetic  doctrines  of  religion,  and  may  thus  become  directive 
to  the  conduct  of  the  serious  Christian.  Understanding  then  by 
Moral  Philosophy,  not  that  pride  of  science  which  borrows  the  dis- 
coveries of  the  Scriptures  and  then  exhibits  itself  as  their  rival,  or 
affects  to  supply  their  deficiences ;  but  as  a  modest  scrutiny  into 
the  reasons  on  which  the  moral  precepts  of  revelation  may  be 
grounded,  and  a  wise  and  honest  application  of  its  moral  principles 
*o  particular  cases,  it  is  a  branch  of  science  which  may  be  usefully 
cultivated,  in  connexion  with  Christianity. 

With  respect  to  the  reasons  on  which  moral  precepts  rest,  we 
may  make  a  remark  similar  to  that  offered  in  a  former  part  of  this 
work,  on  the  doctrines  of  revelation.  Some  of  those  doctrines  rest 
wholly  on  the  authority  of  the  Revealer  ;  others  are  accompanied 
with  a  manifest  rational  evidence  ;  and  a  third  class  may  partially 
disclose  their  rationale  to  the  patient  and  pious  inquirer.  Yet  the 
authority  of  each  class  as  a  subject  of  faith  is  the  same ;  it  rests 


rillRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  211 

upon  the  character  of  God  and  his  relations  to  us  ;  and  that  doc- 
trine is  equally  binding  which  is  enjoined  on  our  faith  without  other 
rational  evidence  than  that  which  proves  it  to  be  a  part  of  a  reve- 
lation from  heaven,  as  that  which  exercises,  and  delights  our 
rational  faculties,  by  a  disclosure  of  the  internal  evidence  of  its 
truth.  When  God  has  permitted  us  to  "  turn  aside"  to  see  some 
"  great  sight"  of  manifested  wisdom,  we  are  to  obey  the  invitation  ; 
but  still  we  are  always  to  remember  that  the  authority  of  a  reveal- 
ed truth  stands  on  infinitely  higher  ground  than  our  perception  oi 
its  reasonableness. 

So  also  as  to  the  moral  precepts  of  the  Bible,  the  rational  evi- 
dence is  afforded  in  different  degrees,  and  it  is  both  allowable  and 
laudable  in  us  to  investigate  and  collect  it ;  but  still  with  this  cau- 
tion, that  the  authority  of  such  injunctions  is  not  to  be  regulated  bj 
our  perception  of  their  reasons,  although  the  reasons,  when  appa- 
rent, may  be  piously  applied  to  commend  the  authority.  The  dis- 
coveries we  may  make  of  fitness  or  any  other  quality  in  a  precept 
cannot  be  the  highest  reason  of  our  obedience ;  but  it  may  be  a 
reason  for  obeying  with  accelerated  alacrity.  The  obligation  of  the 
Habbath  would  be  the  same  were  no  obvious  reasons  of  mercy  and 
piety  connected  with  it ;  but  the  influence  of  the  precept  upon  ouv 
interests  and  that  of  the  community  commends  the  precept  to  oiu 
affections  as  well  as  to  our  sense  of  duty. 

With  respect  to  the  application  of  general  precepts,  that  practical 
wisdom  which  is  the  result  of  large  and  comprehensive  observation 
iias  an  important  office.  The  precepts  of  a  universal  Revelation 
must  necessarily  be,  for  the  most  part,  general,  because  if  rules  had 
been  given  for  each  case  in  detail,  then  truly,  as  St.  John  observes. 
"  the  world  could  not  have  contained  the  books  written."  TIk 
application  of  these  general  principles  to  that  variety  of  cases  whicb 
arises  in  human  affairs,  is  the  work  of  the  Christian  Preacher,  and 
ihe  Christian  Moralist.  Where  there  is  honesty  of  mind,  ordinarily 
there  can  be  no  difficulty  in  this  ;  and  in  cases  which  involve  some 
difficulty,  when  the  interpretation  of  the  law  is  made,  as  it  always 
ought,  to  favour  the  rule ;  and  when,  in  doubtful  cases,  the  safer 
course  is  adopted,  such  is  the  explicit  character  of  the  general  prin- 
ciples of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  that  no  one  can  go  astray.  Thc 
Moral  Philosophy  which  treats  of  exceptions  to  general  rules,  is? 
always  to  be  watched  with  jealousy ;  and  ought  to  be  shunned  whefi 
it  presumes  to  form  rides  out  of  supposed  exceptions.  This  is- 
affecting  to  be  wiser  than  the  Lawgiver;  and  such  philosophy 
assumes  an  authority  in  the  control  of  human  conduct  to  which  it  has 
no  title  ;  and  steps  in  between  individuals  and  their  consciences-  in 


212  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

cases  where  Almighty  God  himself  has  not  chosen  to  relieve  them ; 
and  where  they  are  specially  left,  as  all  sometimes  are,  to  "  Him 
with  whom  they  have  to  do,"  without  the  intervention  of  any  third 
party.  Systems  of  Casuistry  and  Cases  of  Conscience  have  hap- 
pily gone  into  general  disuse.  That  they  have  done  more  harm 
npon  the  whole  than  good,  and  denied  more  consciences  than  they 
have  relieved,  cannot  be  doubted  by  any  one  who  has  largely  ex- 
amined them.  They  have  passed  away  just  in  proportion  as  the 
Scriptures  themselves  have  been  circulated  through  society,  and 
as  that  preaching  has  been  most  prevalent  which  enforces  the  doc- 
trine of  Supreme  Love  to  God  and  our  Neighbour,  as  the  sum  of 
t he  Law  and  of  the  Gospel.  They  most  abounded  in  the  Romish 
Church,  as  best  befitting  its  system  of  darkness  and  delusion; (7) 
and  though  works  of  this  kind  are  found  among  Protestants  in  a 
better  form,  they  have  gradually  and  happily  fallen  into  neglect. 

A  few  words  may  here  be  offered  on  what  has  been  termed,  the 
ground  of  Moral  Obligation. 

Some  writers  have  placed  this  in  "the  eternal  and  necessary 
fitness  of  things ;"  which  leaves  the  matter  open  to  the  varying 
conclusions  which  different  individuals  may  draw,  as  to  this  eternal 
and  necessary  fitness ;  and  still  further,  leaves  that  very  natural 
question  quite  unanswered, — Why  is  any  one  obliged  to  act  ac- 
cording to  the  fitness  of  things  1 

Others  have  referred  to  a  supposed  original  perception  of  what 
is  right  and  wrong  ;  a  kind  of  fixed  and  permanent  and  unalterable 
moral  sense,  by  which  the  qualities  of  actions  are  at  once  deter- 
mined ;  and  from  the  supposed  universal  existence  of  this  percep- 
tion, they  have  argued  the  obligation  to  act  accordingly.  This 
scheme,  which  seems  to  confound  that  in  human  nature  to  which 
an  appeal  may  be  made  when  the  understanding  is  enlightened  by 
veal  truth,  with  a  discriminating  and  directive  principle  acting 
independently  of  instruction,  is  also  unsatisfactory.  For  the  moral 
sense  is,  in  fact,  found  under  the  control  of  ignorance  and  error ; 
nor  does  it  possess  a  sensitiveness  in  all  cases  in  proportion  to  the 
truth  received  into  the  understanding.  The  worst  crimes  have 
often  been  committed  with  a  conviction  of  their  being  right,  as  in 
the  case  of  religious  persecutions ;  and  absence  of  the  habit  of 
attending  to  the  quality  of  our  actions  often  renders  the  abstract 
truth  laid  up  in  the  understanding  useless,  as  to  its  influence  upon 
the  conscience.  But  if  all  that  is  said  of  this  moral  sense  were 
true,  still  it  would  not  establish  the  principle  of  obligation.     That 

(7)  M.  le  Feove,  preceptor  of  Louis  XIII,  not  unaptly  called  Casuistry,  "  The 
art  of  quibbling  with  God." 


THIRD,  j  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  218 

supposes  superior  authority ;  and  should  we  allow  the  moral  sense 
to  act  uniformly,  still  how  is  the  obligation  to  perform  what  it 
approves  to  be  demonstrated,  unless  some  higher  consideration  be 
added  to  the  case  1 

More  modern  moralists  have  taken  the  tendency  of  any  course 
of  action  to  produce  the  greatest  good  upon  the  whole  as  the  source 
of  moral  obligation ;  and  with  this  they  often  connect  the  will  oi 
God,  of  which  they  consider  this  general  tendency  to  be  the  mani- 
festation. It  were  better,  surely,  to  refer  at  once  to  the  will  oi 
God,  as  revealed  by  himself  without  incumbering  the  subject  with 
the  circuitous  and,  at  best,  doubtful  process  of  first  considering 
what  is  good  upon  the  whole,  and  then  inferring  that  this  must 
needs  be  the  will  of  a  wise  and  benevolent  Being.  The  objection, 
too,  holds  in  this  case,  that  this  theory  leaves  it  still  a  mere  matter 
of  opinion,  in  which  an  interested  party  is  to  be  the  judge,  whether 
an  action  be  upon  the  whole  good  ;  and  gives  a  rule  which  would 
be  with  difficulty  applied  to  some  cases,  and  is  scarcely  at  all 
applicable  to  many  others  which  may  be  supposed. 

The  only  satisfactory  answer  which  the  question  as  to  the  source 
of  moral  obligation,  can  receive,  is,  that  it  is  found  in  the  will  or 
God.  For  since  the  question  respects  the  duty  of  a  created  being 
with  reference  to  his  Creator,  nothing  can  be  more  conclusive  than 
that  the  Creator  has  an  absolute  right  to  the  obedience  of  his  crea- 
tures ;  and  that  the  creature  is  in  duty  obliged  to  obey  Him  from 
whom  it  not  only  has  received  being,  but  by  whom  that  being  is 
constantly  sustained.  It  has  indeed  been  said,  that  even  if  it  be 
admitted,  that  I  am  obliged  to  obey  the  will  of  God,  the  question 
is  still  open,  "  Why  am  I  obliged  to  obey  his  will  I"  and  that  this 
brings  us  round  to  the  former  answer ;  because  he  can  only  will 
what  is  upon  the  whole  best  for  his  creatures.  But  this  is  con- 
founding that  which  may  be,  and  doubtless  is,  a  rule  to  God  in 
the  commands  which  he  issues,  with  that  which  really  obliges  the 
creature.  Now,  that  which  in  truth  obliges  the  creature  is  not  the 
nature  of  the  commands  issued  by  God  ;  but  the  relation  in  which 
the  creature  itself  stands  to  God.  If  a  creature  can  have  no 
existence,  nor  any  power  or  faculty  independently  of  God,  it  can 
have  no  right  to  employ  its  faculties  independently  of  him  ;  and  if 
it  have  no  right  to  employ  its  faculties  in  an  independent  manner, 
the  right  to  rule  its  conduct  must  rest  with  the  Creator  alone  ;  and 
from  this  results  the  obligation  of  the  creature  to  obey. 

Such  is  the  principle  assumed  in  the  Scriptures,  where  the  crea- 
tive and  rectoral  relations  of  God  are  inseparably  united,  and  the 
obligation  of  obedience  is  made  to  follow  upon  the  fact  of  our  exist- 


214  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

cnce ;  and  if  the  will  of  God,  as  the  source  of  obligation,  be  so 
obvious  a  rule,  the  only  remaining  question  is,  whether  we  shall 
receive  that  will  as  it  is  expressly  revealed  by  himself;  or,  wilfully 
forgetting  that  such  a  revelation  has  been  made,  we  shall  proceed 
to  infer  it  by  various  processes  of  induction  1  The  answer  to  this 
might  have  been  safely  left  to  the  common  sense  of  mankind,  had 
not  the  vanity  of  philosophizing  so  often  interposed  to  perplex  so 
plain  a  point. 

We  must  not  here  confound  the  will  of  God  as  the  source  of 
moral  obligation,  with  the  notion  that  right  and  wrong  have  no 
existence  but  as  they  are  so  constituted  by  the  will  of  God.  They 
must  have  their  foundation  in  the  reality  of  things.  What  moral 
rectitude  is,  and  why  it  obliges,  are  quite  distinct  questions.  It  is 
?o  the  latter  only  that  the  preceding  observations  apply.  As  to  the 
former,  the  following  remarks,  from  a  recent  intelligent  publication, 
are  very  satisfactory : — 

"  Virtue,  as  it  regards  man,  is  the  conformity  or  harmony  of  his 
affections  and  actions  with  the  various  relations  in  Avhich  he  has 
been  placed, — of  which  conformity  the  perfect  intellect  of  God, 
guided  in  its  exercise  by  his  infinitely  holy  nature,  is  the  only  infal- 
lible judge. 

"  We  sustain  various  relations  to  God  himself.  He  is  our  Cre- 
ator,— our  Preserver, — our  Benefactor, — our  Governor.  '  He  is 
the  Framer  of  our  bodies,  and  the  Father  of  our  spirits.'  He  sus- 
tains us  '  by  the  word  of  his  power ;'  for,  as  we  are  necessarily 
dependent  beings,  our  continued  existence  is  a  kind  of  prolonged 
creation.  We  owe  all  that  we  possess  to  Him ;  and  our  future 
blessings  must  flow  from  his  kindness.  Now  there  are  obviously 
certain  affections  and  actions  which  harmonize  or  correspond  with 
these  relations.  To  love  and  obey  God  manifestly  befit  our  relation 
to  him,  as  that  great  Being  from  whom  our  existence  as  well  as  all 
our  comforts  flow.  He  who  showers  his  blessings  upon  us  ought 
to  possess  our  affections ;  he  who  formed  us  has  a  right  to  our 
obedience.  It  is  not  stated  merely,  let  it  be  observed,  that  it  is 
impossible  to  contemplate  our  relation  to  God  without  perceiving 
that  we  are  morally  bound  to  love  and  obey  him ;  (though  that  is 
a  truth  of  great  importance  ;)  for  I  do  not  consent  to  the  propriety 
of  the  representation,  that  virtue  depends  either  upon  our  percep- 
tions or  our  feelings.  There  is  a  real  harmony  between  the  relations 
in  which  we  stand  to  God,  and  the  feelings  and  conduct  to  which 
reference  has  been  made  ;  and  therefore  the  human  mind  has  been 
Ormed  capable  of  perceiving  and  feeling  it. 

•'  We  sustain  various  relations  to  each  other.    God  has  formed  'of 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  216 

one  blood  all  the  families  of  the  earth.'  Mutual  love  and  brotherly 
kindness,  the  fruit  of  love,  are  required  by  this  relation, — they  har- 
monize or  correspond  with  it.  We  are  children ;  we  are  loved, 
and  guarded,  and  supported,  and  tended  with  unwearied  assiduity 
by  our  parents.  Filial  affection  and  filial  obedience  are  demanded 
by  this  relation ;  no  other  state  of  mind,  no  other  conduct,  will 
harmonize  with  it.  We  are,  perhaps,  on  the  other  hand,  parents. 
Instrumentally  at  least  we  have  imparted  existence  to  our  chil- 
dren ;  they  depend  on  us  for  protection,  support,  &c ;  and  to 
render  that  support,  is  required  by  the  relation  we  bear  to  them. 
It  is,  however,  needless  to  specify  the  various  relations  in  which 
we  stand  to  each  other.  With  reference  to  all  I  again  say,  that 
they  necessarily  involve  obligations  to  certain  states  of  mind,  and 
certain  modes  of  conduct,  as  harmonizing  with  the  relations ;  and 
that  rectitude  is  the  conformity  of  the  character  and  conduct  of  an 
individual  with  the  relations  in  which  he  stands  to  the  beings  by 
whom  he  is  surrounded. 

"  It  is  by  no  means  certain  to  me,  that  this  harmony  between 
the  actions  and  the  relations  of  a  moral  agent,  is  not  what  we  are 
to  understand  by  that  '  conformity  to  the  fitness  of  things,'  in  which 
some  writers  have  made  the  essence  of  virtue  to  consist.  Agains? 
this  doctrine,  it  has  been  objected,  that  it  is  indefinite,  if  not  absurd : 
because,  as  it  is  alleged,  it  represents  an  action  as  right  and  fit. 
without  stating  what  it  is  fit  for, — an  absurdity  as  great,  says  the 
objector,  as  it* would  be  to  say  that  'the  angles  at  the  base  of  an 
isosceles  triangle  are  equal  without  adding  to  one  another,  or  to 
any  other  angle.'  Dr.  Brown  also,  in  arguing  against  this  doctrine, 
says,  *  There  must  be  a  principle  of  moral  regard,  independent  oi 
reason,  or  reason  may  in  vain  see  a  thousand  fitnesses,  and  a  thou- 
sand truths  ;  and  would  be  warmed  with  the  same  lively  emotions 
of  indignation,  against  an  inaccurate  timepiece  or  an  error  in 
arithmetic  calculation,  as  against  the  wretch  who  robbed,  by  every 
fraud  that  could  elude  the  law,  those  who  had  already  little  of 
which  they  could  be  deprived,  that  he  might  riot  a  little  more  luxu- 
riously, while  the  helpless,  whom  he  had  plundered,  were  starving 
around  him.'  Now,  why  may  we  not  say,  in  answer  to  the  former 
objector,  that  the  conformity  of  an  action  with  the  relations  of  the 
agent,  is  the  fitness  for  which  Clarke  contends?  And  why  may 
not  we  reply  to  Dr.  Brown,  that, — allowing,  as  we  do,  the  neces- 
sity of  that  susceptibility  of  moral  emotion  for  which  he  contends,— 
the  emotion  of  approbation  which  arises  on  the  contemplation  of  a 
virtuous  action,  is  not  the  virtue  of  the  action,  nor  the  perception 
of  its  accordance  with  the  relations  of  the  agent,  but  the  accorp- 


216  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

ance  itself  ]  *  That  a  being,'  says  Dewar,  'endowed  with  cer- 
tain powers,  is  bound  to  love  and  obey  the  Creator  and  Preserver 
of  all,  is  truth,  whether  I  perceive  it  or  no ;  and  we  cannot  perceive 
it  possible  that  it  can  ever  be  reversed.' 

"  All  the  relations  to  which  reference  has  been  made,  are,  in  one 
sense,  arbitrary.  Our  existence  as  creatures  is  to  be  ascribed  to 
the  mere  good  pleasure  of  God.  The  relations  which  bind  society 
together,  the  conjugal,  parental,  filial  relation,  depend  entirely  upon 
the  sovereign  will  of  Him  who  gave  us  our  being ;  but  the  conduct 
to  which  these  relations  oblige  us,  is  by  no  means  arbitrary.  Hav- 
ing determined  to  constitute  the  relations,  He  could  not  but  enjoin 
upon  us  the  conduct  which  his  word  prescribes.  He  was  under  no 
obligation  to  create  us  at  all ;  but,  having  given  us  existence,  he 
could  not  fail  to  command  us  to  love  and  obey  him.  There  is  a 
harmony  between  these  relations,  and  these  duties, — a  harmony 
which  is  not  only  perceived  by  us, — for  to  state  that  merely,  would 
seem  to  make  our  perceptions  the  rule,  if  not  the  foundation,  of 
duty, — but  which  is  perceived  by  the  perfect  intellect  of  God  him- 
self.  And  since  the  relations  we  sustain  were  constituted  by  God. 
since  he  is  the  Judge  of  the  affections  and  conduct  which  harmonize 
with  these  relations, — that  which  appears  right  to  Him,  being  right 
on  that  account, — rectitude  may  be  regarded  as  conformity  to  the  moral 
nature  of  God,  the  ultimate  standard  of  virtue ."(8) 

To  the  revealed  will  of  God  we  may  now  turn  for  information 
on  the  interesting  subject  of  morals,  and  we  shall  find  that  the 
ethics  of  Christianity  have  a  glory  and  perfection  which  philosophy 
has  never  heightened,  and  which  its  only  true  office  is  to  display, 
and  to  keep  before  the  attention  of  mankind. 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  Duties  we  owe  to  God. 

The  duties  we  owe  to  God  are  in  Scripture  summed  up  in  the 
word  "  Godliness,"  the  foundation  of  which,  and  of  duties  of  every 
other  kind,  is  that  entire 

Submission  to  God,  which  springs  from  a  due  sense  of  that 
relation  in  which  we  stand  to  him,  as  creatures. 

.  We  have  just  seen  that  the  right  of  an  absolute  sovereignty  over 

us  must,  in  the  reason  of  the  case,  exist  exclusively  in  Him  that 

made  us ;  and  it  is  the  perception  and  recognition  of  this,  as  a 

■practical  habit  of  the  mind,  which  renders  outward  acts  of  obe- 

(S)  Payne's  Ehrnents  of  Menial  and  Moral  Science. 


hlllRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  21? 

dience  sincere  and  religious.  The  will  of  God  is  the  only  rule  to 
man,  in  every  thing  on  which  that  will  has  declared  itself;  and,  as 
it  lays  its  injunctions  upon  the  heart  as  well  as  the  life,  the  rule  is 
equally  in  force  when  it  directs  our  opinions,  our  motives,  and 
affections,  as  when  it  enjoins  or  prohibits  external  acts.  We  are 
his  because  he  made  us ;  and  to  this  is  added  the  confirmation  of 
this  right  by  our  redemption  :  "  Ye  are  not  your  own,  but  bought 
with  a  price  ;  wherefore  glorify  God  in  your  bodies  and  spirts 
which  are  his."  These  ideas  of  absolute  right  to  command  on  the 
part  of  God,  and  of  absolute  obligation  to  universal  obedience  on 
the  part  of  man,  are  united  in  the  profession  of  St.  Paul,  "Whose 
[  am  and  whom  I  serve ;"  and  form  the  grand  fundamental  principle 
of  "  godliness"  both  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament ;  the  will  of 
God  being  laid  down  in  each,  both  as  the  highest  reason  and  the 
most  powerful  motive  to  obedience.  The  application  of  this  prin- 
ciple so  established  by  the  Scriptures  will  show  how  greatly  superior 
is  the  ground  on  which  Christianity  places  moral  virtue  to  that  of 
any  other  system.    For, 

1.  The  will  of  God,  which  is  the  rule  of  duty,  is  authenticated  by 
the  whole  of  that  stupendous  evidence  which  proves  the  Scriptures 
to  be  of  divine  original. 

2.  That  will  at  once  defines  and  enforces  every  branch  of  inward 
and  outward  purity,  rectitude,  and  benevolence. 

3.  It  annuls  by  its  authority  every  other  rule  of  conduct  con- 
trary to  itself,  whether  it  arise  from  custom,  or  from  the  example, 
persuasion,  or  opinions  of  others. 

4.  It  is  a  rule  which  admits  not  of  being  lowered  to  the  weak 
and  fallen  state  of  human  nature ;  but,  connecting  itself  with  a 
gracious  dispensation  of  supernatural  help,  it  directs  the  morally 
imbecile  to  that  remedy,  and  holds  every  one  guilty  of  the  violation 
of  all  that  he  is  by  nature  and  habit  unable  to  perform,  if  that 
remedy  be  neglected. 

5.  It  accommodates  not  itself  to  the  interests  or  even  safety  of 
men ;  but  requires  that  interest,  honour,  liberty,  and  life,  should  be 
surrendered,  rather  than  it  should  sustain  any  violation. 

6.  It  admits  no  exceptions  in  obedience ;  but  requires  it  whole 
and  entire ;  so  that  outward  virtue  cannot  be  taken  in  the  place  of 
that  which  has  its  seat  in  the  heart ;  and  it  allows  no  acts  to  be 
really  virtuous,  but  those  which  spring  from  a  willing  and  sub 
missive  mind,  and  are  done  upon  the  vital  principle  of  a  distinct 
recognition  of  our  rightful  subjection  to  God. 

Love  to  God.     To  serve  and  obey  God  on  the  conviction  that 
it  is  right  to  serve  and  obey  him,  is  in  Christianity  joined  with  that 
Vol.  III.  27 


218  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PAR 

love  to  God  which  gives  life  and  animation  to  service,  and  renders 
it  the  means  of  exalting  our  pleasures,  at  the  same  time  that  it 
accords  with  our  convictions.  The  supreme  love  of  God  is  the 
chief,  therefore,  of  what  have  been  called  our  theopathetic  affections. 
It  is  the  sum  and  the  end  of  law  ;  and  though  lost  by  us  in  Adam,  is 
restored  to  Us  by  Christ,  When  it  regards  God  absolutely,  and  in 
himself,  as  a  Being  of  infinite  and  harmonious  perfections  and  moral 
beauties,  it  is  that  movement  of  the  soul  towards  him  which  is  pro- 
duced by  admiration,  approval,  and  delight.  When  it  regards  him 
relatively,  it  fixes  upon  the  ceaseless  emanations  of  his  goodness  to 
us  in  the  continuance  of  the  existence  which  he  at  first  bestowed  : 
the  circumstances  which  render  that  existence  felicitous ;  and. 
above  all,  upon  that  "great  love  wherewith  he  loved  us,"  mani- 
fested in  the  gift  of  his  Son  for  our  redemption,  and  in  saving  us  by 
his  grace ;  or,  in  the  forcible  language  of  St.  Paul,  upon  "  the 
exceeding  riches  of  his  grace  in  his  kindness  to  us  through  Christ 
Jesus."  Under  all  these  views  an  unbounded  gratitude  overflows 
the  heart  which  is  influenced  by  this  spiritual  affection.  But  the 
love  of  God  is  more  than  a  sentiment  of  gratitude.  It  rejoices  in 
his  perfections  and  glories,  and  devoutly  contemplates  them  as  the 
highest  and  most  interesting  subjects  of  thought ;  it  keeps  the  idea 
of  this  supremely-beloved  object  constantly  present  to  the  mind  ;  it 
turns  to  it  with  adoring  ardour  from  the  business  and  distractions  of 
life ;  it  connects  it  with  every  scene  of  majesty  and  beauty  in  nature, 
and  with  every  event  of  general  and  particular  providence  ;  it  brings 
the  soul  into  fellowship  with  God,  real  and  sensible,  because  vital ; 
it  moulds  the  other  affections  into  conformity  with  what  God  him- 
self wills  or  prohibits,  loves  or  hates ;  it  produces  an  unbounded 
desire  to  please  him,  and  to  be  accepted  of  him  in  all  things ;  it  is 
jealous  of  his  honour,  unwearied  in  his  service,  quick  to  prompt  to 
every  sacrifice  in  the  cause  of  his  truth  and  his  Church ;  and  it 
renders  all  such  sacrifices,  even  when  carried  to  the  extent  of  suffer- 
ing and  death,  unreluctant  and  cheerful.  It  chooses  God  as  the 
chief  good  of  the  soul,  the  enjoyment  of  which  assures  its  perfect 
and  eternal  interest  and  happiness.  "  Whom  have  I  in  heaven  but 
thee  1  and  there  is  none  upon  earth  that  I  desire  beside  thee,"  is 
the  language  of  every  heart,  when  its  love  of  God  is  true  in  prin- 
ciple and  supreme  in  degree. 

If,  then,  the  will  of  God  is  the  perfect  rule  of  morals ;  and  if 
supreme  and  perfect  love  to  God  must  produce  a  prompt,  an 
unwearied,  a  delightful  subjection  to  his  will,  or  rather,  an  entire 
and  most  free  choice  of  it  as  the  rule  of  all  our  principles,  affec- 
tions, and  actions ;  the  importance  of  this  affection  in  securing  that 


l'HIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  219 

obedience  to  the  law  of  God  in  which  true  morality  consists,  is 
manifest;  and  we  clearly  perceive  the  reason  why  an  inspired 
writer  has  affirmed,  that  "  love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law."  The 
necessity  of  keeping  this  subject  before  us  under  those  views  in 
which  it  is  placed  in  the  Christian  system,  and  of  not  surrendering 
it  to  mere  philosophy,  is,  however,  an  important  consideration. 
With  the  philosopher  the  love  of  God  may  be  the  mere  approval 
of  the  intellect ;  or  a  sentiment  which  results  from  the  contempla- 
tion of  infinite  perfection,  manifesting  itself  in  acts  of  power  and 
goodness.  In  the  Scriptures  it  is  much  more  than  either,  and  is 
produced  and  maintained  by  a  different  process.  We  are  there 
taught  that  "  the  carnal  mind  is  enmity  to  God ;"  and  is  not  oi 
course  capable  of  loving  God.  Yet  this  carnal  mind  may  consist 
with  deep  attainments  in  philosophy,  and  with  strongly  impassioned 
poetic  sentiment.  The  mere  approval  of  the  understanding ;  and 
the  susceptibility  of  being  impressed  with  feelings  of  admiration, 
awe,  and  even  pleasure,  when  the  character  of  God  is  manifested 
in  his  works,  as  both  may  be  found  in  the  carnal  mind  which  is 
enmity  to  God,  are  not  therefore  the  love  of  God.  They  are  prin- 
ciples which  enter  into  that  love,  since  it  cannot  exist  without 
them ;  but  they  may  exist  without  this  affection  itself,  and  be  found 
in  a  vicious  and  unchanged  nature.  The  love  of  God  is  a  fruit  oi 
the  Holy  Spirit ;  that  is,  it  is  implanted  by  him  only  in  the  souls 
which  he  has  regenerated  ;  and,  as  that  which  excites  its  exercise 
is  chiefly,  and  in  the  first  place,  a  sense  of  the  benefits  bestowed 
by  the  grace  of  God  in  our  redemption,  and  a  well-grounded  per- 
suasion of  our  personal  interest  in  those  benefits,  it  necessarily  pre- 
supposes our  personal  reconciliation  to  God  through  faith  in  the 
atonement  of  Christ,  and  that  attestation  of  it  to  the  heart  by  the 
Spirit  of  Adoption  of  which  we  have  before  spoken.  We  here  see, 
then,  another  proof  of  the  necessary  connexion  of  Christian  morals 
with  Christian  doctrine,  and  how  imperfect  and  deceptive  every 
system  must  be  which  separates  them.  Love  is  essential  to  true 
obedience ;  for  when  the  Apostle  declares  love  to  be  "  the  fulfil- 
ling of  the  law,"  he  declares,  in  effect,  that  the  law  cannot  be 
fulfilled  without  love  ;  and  that  every  action  which  has  not  this  for 
its  principle,  however  virtuous  in  its  show,  fails  of  accomplishing 
the  precepts  which  are  obligatory  upon  us.  But  this  love  to  God 
cannot  be  felt  so  long  as  we  are  sensible  of  his  wrath,  and  are  in 
dread  of  his  judgments.  These  feelings  are  incompatible  with  each 
other,  and  we  must  be  assured  of  his  reconciliation  to  us,  before  we 
are  capable  of  loving  him.  Thus  the  very  existence  of  the  love  ol 
Hod  implies  the  doctrines  of  the  atonement,  repentance,  faith,  and 


220  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  {  PAR 1 

the  gift  of  the  Spirit  of  Adoption  to  believers ;  and  unless  it  be 
taught  in  this  connexion,  and  through  this  process  of  experience, 
it  will  be  exhibited  only  as  a  bright  and  beauteous  object  to  which 
man  has  no  access ;  or  a  fictitious  and  imitative  sentimentalism 
will  be  substituted  for  it,  to  the  delusion  of  the  souls  of  men, 

A  third  leading  duty  is, 

Trust  in  God.  All  creatures  are  dependent  upon  God  for 
being  and  for  well  being.  Inanimate  and  irrational  beings  hold 
their  existence  and  the  benefits  which  may  accompany  it,  independ 
ently  of  any  conditions  to  be  performed  on  their  part.  Rational 
creatures  are  placed  under  another  rule,  and  their  felicity  rests- 
only  upon  their  obedience.  Whether,  as  to  those,  intelligences  who 
have  never  sinned,  specific  exercises  of  trust  are  required  as  a  dut\ 
comprehended  in  their  general  obedience,  we  know  not.  But  as  to 
men,  the  whole  Scripture  shows,  that  faith  or  trust  is  a  duty  of  the 
first  class,  and  that  they  "  stand  only  by  faith."  Whether  the 
reason  of  this  may  be  the  importance  to  themselves  of  being  con- 
tinually  impressed  with  their  dependence  upon  God,  so  that  the} 
may  fly  to  him  at  all  times,  and  escape  the  disappointments  of  sell 
confidence,  and  creature  reliances ;  or  that  as  all  good  actually 
comes  from  God,  he  ought  to  be  recognised  as  its  source,  so  that 
all  creatures  may  glorify  him  ;  or  whether  other  and  more  secret 
reasons  may  also  be  included  ;  the  fact,  that  this  duty  is  solemnl  v 
enjoined  as  an  essential  part  of  true  religion,  cannot  be  doubted. 
Nor  can  the  connexion  of  this  habit  of  devoutly  confiding  in  God 
with  our  peace  of  mind  be  overlooked.  WTe  have  so  many  proofs 
of  the  weakness  both  of  Our  intellectual  and  physical  powers,  ami 
see  ourselves  so  liable  to  the  influence  of  combinations  of  circum- 
stances which  we  cannot  control,  and  of  accidents  which  we  cannot 
resist,  that,  unless  we  had  assurances  of  being  guided,  upheld,  and 
defended  by  a  Supreme  Power,  we  might  become,  and  that  nor 
unreasonably,  a  prey  to  constant  apprehensions,  and  the  sport  ol 
the  most  saddening  anticipations  of  the  imagination.  Our  sole 
remedy  from  these  would,  in  fact,  only  be  found  in  insensibility 
and  thoughtlessness ;  for  to  a  reflecting  and  awakened  mind, 
nothing  can  shut  out  uneasy  fears,  but  faith  in  God.  In  all  ages 
therefore  this  has  been  the  resource  of  devout  men  :  "  God  is  om 
refuge  and  strength,  a  very  present  help  in  trouble  ;  therefore  will 
we  not  fear,"  &c,  Psalm  xlvi,  1.  "  Our  fathers  trusted  in  thee,  and 
thou  didst  deliver  them  ;  they  cried  unto  thee,  and  were  delivered  ; 
they  trusted  in  thee,  and  were  not  confounded."  And  from  oui 
Lord's  sermon  on  the  mount  it  is  clear,  that  one  end  of  his  teaching 
■vas  to  deliver  men  from  the  piercing  anxieties  which  the  perplexi- 


THIRD. J  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  221 

ties  of  this  lite  are  apt  to  produce,  by  encouraging  them  to  confide 
in  the  care  and  bounty  of  their  "  Heavenly  Father." 

Our  trust  in  God  is  enjoined  in  as  many  respects  as  he  has  been 
pleased  to  give  us  assurances  of  help,  and  promises  of  favour,  in 
his  own  word.  Beyond  that,  trust  would  be  presumption,  as  not 
having  authority ;  and  to  the  full  extent  in  which  his  gracious  pur- 
poses towards  us  are  manifested,  it  becomes  a  duty.  And  here  too 
the  same  connexion  of  this  duty  with  the  leading  doctrines  of  our 
redemption,  which  we  have  remarked  under  the  last  particular, 
also  displays  itself.  If  morals  be  taught  independent  of  religion, 
cither  affiance  in  God  must  be  excluded  from  the  list  of  duties 
towards  God,  or  otherwise  it  will  be  inculcated  without  effect.  A 
man  who  is  conscious  of  unremitted  sins,  and  who  must  therefore 
regard  the  administration  of  the  Ruler  of  the  world,  as  to  him  puni- 
tive and  vengeful,  can  find  no  ground  on  which  to  rest  his  trust. 
All  that  he  can  do  is  to  hope  that  his  relations  to  this  Being  may  in 
future  become  more  favourable ;  but,  for  the  present,  his  fears 
must  prevent  the  exercise  of  his  faith.  What  course  then  lies  before 
him,  but  in  the  first  instance  to  seek  the  restoration  of  the  favour 
of  his  offended  God,  in  that* method  which  he  has  prescribed, 
namely,  by  repentance  towards  God,  and  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  1  Till  a  scriptural  assurance  is  obtained  of  that  change  in 
his  relations  to  God  which  is  effected  by  the  free  and  gracious  act 
of  forgiveness,  all  the  reasons  of  general  trust  in  the  care,  benedic- 
tion, and  guidance  oftiod,  are  vain  as  to  him,  because  they  are 
not  applicable  to  his  case.  But  when  friendship  is  restored  between 
the  parties,  faith,  however  unlimited,  has  the  highest  reason.  It  is 
then  "a  sure  confidence  in  the  mercy  of  God  through  Christ,"  as 
that  mercy  manifests  itself  in  all  the  promises  which  God  has  been 
pleased  to  make  to  his  children,  and  in  all  those  condescending- 
relations  with  which  he  has  been  pleased  to  invest  himself,  that 
under  such  manifestations  he  might  win  and  secure  our  reliance. 
It  is  then  the  confidence  not  merely  of  creatures  in  a  beneficent 
Creator,  or  of  subjects  in  a  gracious  Sovereign,  but  of  children  in 
a  Parent.  It  respects  the  supply  of  every  want,  temporal  and 
eternal ;  the  wise  and  gracious  ordering  of  our  concerns ;  the 
warding  off,  or  the  mitigation  of  calamities  and  afflictions ;  our 
preservation  from  all  that  can  upon  the  whole  be  injurious  to  us ; 
our  guidance  through  life  ;  our  hope  in  death ;  and  our  future 
felicity  in  another  world.  This  trust  is  a  duty  because  it  is  a  sub- 
ject of  command  ;  and  also  because,  after  such  demonstrations  of 
kindness,  distrust  would  imply  a  dishonourable  denial  of  the  love 
?nd  faithfulness  of  God,  and  often  also  a  criminal  dependence  upon 

25* 


•}22  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES,  [PART 

the  creature.  It  is  a  habit  essential  to  piety.  On  that  condition  wt 
"  obtain  promises,"  by  making  them  the  subjects  of  prayer  ;  by  its 
influence  anxieties  destructive  to  that  calm  contemplative  habit  ot' 
which  true  religion  is  both  the  offspring  and  the  nurse,  are  expelled 
from  the  heart ;  a  spiritual  character  is  thus  given  to  man,  who 
walks  as  seeing  "  Him  who  is  invisible  ;"  and  a  noble  and  cheerful 
courage  is  infused  into  the  soul,  which  elevates  it  above  aH  cow- 
ardly shrinking  from  difficulty,  suffering,  pain,  and  death,  ann 
affords  a  practical  exemplification  of  the  exhortation  of  one  who 
had  tried  the  value  of  this  grace  in  a  great  variety  of  exigencies  : 
"Wait  upon  the  Lord,  be  of  good  courage,  and  he  shall  strengthen 
thine  heart ;  wait,  I  say,  upon  the  Lord." 

The  Fear  of  God  is  associated  with  Love,  and  Trust,  in  every 
part  of  Holy  Scripture  ;  and  is  enjoined  upon  us  as  another  of  our 
leading  duties. . 

This,  however,  is  not  a  servile  passion ;  for  then  it  could  not 
consist  with  Love  to  God,  and  with  delight  and  affiance  in  him. 
It  is  true  that  "  the  fear  which  hath  torment ;"  that  which  is 
accompanied  with  painful  apprehensions  of  his  displeasure  arising 
from  a  just  conviction  of  our  personal  liability  to  it,  is  enjoined 
upon  the  careless  and  the  impious.  To  produce  this,  the  word  of 
God  fulminates  in  threatenings,  and  his  judgments  march  through 
the  earth,  exhibiting  terrible  examples  of  vengeance  against  one 
nation  or  individual  for  the  admonition  of  others.  But  that  fear  of 
God  which  arises  from  apprehension  of  personal  punishment,  is  not 
designed  to  be  the  habit  of  the  mind ;  nor  is  it  included  in  the 
frequent  phrase,  "the  fear  of  the  Lord,"  when  that  is  used  to  express 
the  whole  of  practical  religion,  or  its  leading  principles.  In  thai 
case  its  nature  is,  in  part,  expressed  by  the  term  "  Reverence," 
which  is  a  due  and  humbling  sense  of  the  divine  Majesty,  produce*: 
and  maintained  in  a  mind  regenerated  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  by 
devout  meditations  upon  the  perfections  of  his  infinite  nature,  his 
eternity  and  omniscience,  his.  constant  presence  with  us  in  every 
place,  the  depths  of  his  counsels,  the  might  of  his  power,  the 
holiness,  truth,  and  justice  of  his  moral  character  ;  and  on  the  mani- 
festations of  these  glories  in  the  works  of  that  mighty  visible  nature 
with  which  we  are  surrounded,  in  the  government  of  angels,  devils, 
and  men,  and  in  the  revelations  of  his  inspired  word. 

With  this  deeply  reverential  awe  of  God,  is,  however,  constantly 
joined  in  Scripture,  a  persuasion  of  our  conditional  liability  to  his 
displeasure.  For  since  all  who  have  obtained  his  mercy  and 
favour  by  Christ,  receive  those  blessings  through  an  atonement, 
which  itself  demonstrates  that  we  are  under  a  righteous  adminis 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  223 

<  ration,  and  that  neither  is  the  Law  of  God  repealed,  nor  docs  hi> 
Justice  sleep  ;  and  further,  since  the  saving  benefits  of  that  atone- 
ment  are  conditional,  and  we  ourselves  have  the  power  to  turn 
aside  the  benefit  of  its  interposition  from  us,  or  to  forfeit  it  when 
once  received,  in  whole  or  in  part,  it  is  clear  that  whilst  there  is  a 
full  provision  for  our  deliverance  from  the  "  spirit  of  bondage  unto 
fear  •"  there  is  sufficient  reason  why  we  ought  to  be  so  impressed 
with  our  spiritual  dangers,  as  to  produce  in  us  that  cautionary  fear 
of  the  holiness,  justice  and  power  of  God,  which  shall  deter  us 
from  offending,  and  lead  us  often  to  view,  with  a  restraining  and 
salutary  dread,  those  consequences  of  unfaithfulness  and  disobe- 
dience to  which,  at  least  whilst  we  remain  on  earth,  we  are  liable. 
Powerful,  therefore,  as  are  the  reasons  by  which  the  scriptural 
revelation  of  the  mercy  and  benevolence  of  God  enforces  a  firm 
affiance  in  him,  it  exhorts  us  not  to  be  "high-minded,"  but  to 
"  fear ;"  to  "  fear"  lest  we  "  come  short"  of  the  "  promise"  of 
entering  "  into  his  rest ;"  to  be  in  "  the  fear  of  the  Lord  all  the 
day  long ;"  and  to  pass  the  whole  time  of  our  "  sojourning"  here 
"  in  fear." 

This  scriptural  view  of  the  Fear  of  God,  as  combining  both 
reverence  of  the  Divine  Majesty,  and  a  suitable  apprehension  of 
our  conditional  liability  to  his  displeasure,  is  of  large  practical 
influence. 

It  restrains  our  faith  from  degenerating  into  presumption  ;  our 
love  into  familiarity  ;  our  joy  into  carelessness.  It  nurtures  humility, 
watchfulness,  and  the  spirit  of  prayer.  It  induces  a  reverent  habil 
of  thinking  and  speaking  of  God,  and  gives  solemnity  to  the  exer- 
cises of  devotion.  It  presents  sin  to  us  under  its  true  aspect,  as 
dangerous,  as  well  as  corrupting  to  the  soul ;  as  darkening  our 
prospects  in  a  future  life,  as  well  as  injurious  to  our  peace  in  the 
pres'ent ;  and  it  gives  strength  and  efficacy  to  that  most  important 
practical  moral  principle,  the  constant  reference  of  our  inward 
habits  of  thought  and  feeling,  and  our  outward  actions,  to  the 
approbation  of  Goel 

Upon  these  internal  principles  that  moral  habit  and  state,  which 
is  often  expressed  by  the  term  holiness,  rests.  Separate  from 
these  principles,  it  can  only  consist  in  visible  acts,  imperfect  in 
themselves,  because  not  vital,  and,  however  commended  by  men, 
abominable  to  God  who  trieth  the  heart.  But  when  such  acts 
proceed  from  these  sources,  they  are  proportioned  to  the  strength 
and  purity  of  the  principle  which  originates  them,  except  as  in 
some  cases  they  may  be  influenced  and.  deteriorated  by  an  unin- 
"<"1  or  weak  judgment.      An  entire  submission  to  God;  a 


IM  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

",  perfect  love"  to  him ;  firm  affiance  in  his  covenant  engagements ; 
and  that  fear  which  abases  the  spirit  before  God,  and  departs  even 
from  "  the  appearance  of  evil,"  when  joined  with  a  right  under- 
standing of  the  word  of  God,  render  "  the  man  of  God  perfect,'" 
and  "  thoroughly  furnish  him  to  every  good  work." 

Besides  these  inward  principles  and  affections,  there  are,  how- 
ever, several  other  habits  and  acts,  a  public  performance  of  which. 
as  well  as  their  more  secret  exercises,  have  been  termed  by  Divines 
our  external  duties  towards  God  ;  the  term  "  external"  being, 
however,  so  used  as  not  to  exclude  those  exercises  of  the  heart  from 
which  they  must  all  spring  if  acceptable  to  God.     The  first  is, 

Prayer,  which  is  a  solemn  addressing  of  our  minds  to  God,  a? 
the  Fountain  of  being  and  happiness,  the  Ruler  of  the  world,  and 
the  Father  of  the  family  of  man.  It  includes  in  it  the  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  divine  perfections  and  sovereignty  ;  thankfulness 
for  the  mercies  we  have  received ;  penitential  confession  of  our 
sins  ;  and  an  earnest  entreaty  of  blessings,  both  for  ourselves  and 
others.  When  vocal  it  is  an  external  act,  but  supposes  the  corres- 
pondence of  the  will  and  affection  ;  yet  it  may  be  .purely  mental, 
all  the  acts  of  which  it  is  composed  being  often  conceived  in  the 
mind,  when  not  clothed  in  words. 

That  the  practice  of  prayer  is  enjoined  upon  us  in  Scripture,  is 
sufficiently  proved  by  a  few  quotations :  "  Ask,  and  it  shall  be 
given  you ;  seek,  and  ye  shall  find  ;  knock,  and  it  shall  be  opened," 
Matt,  vii,  7.  "  Watch  ye  therefore  and  pray  always,"  Luke  xxi,  36. 
••  Be  careful  for  nothing ;  but,  in  every  thing  by  prayer  and  suppli- 
cation with  thanksgiving,  let  your  requests  be  made  known  unto 
God,"  Phil,  iv,  6.  "  Pray  without  ceasing,"  1  Thess.  v,  17.  That 
prayer  necessarily  includes  earnestness,  and  that  perseverance 
which  is  inspired  by  strong  desire,  is  evident  from  the  Jews  being 
so  severely  reproved  for  "  drawing  near  to  God  with  their  lips, 
whilst  their  hearts  were  far  from  him :" — from  the  general  rule  oi 
our  Lord  laid  down  in  his  conversation  with  the  woman  of  Sychar : 
"  God  is  a  Spirit ;  and  they  that  worship  him,  must  worship  him 
in  spirit  and  in  truth"  John  iv,  24, — and,  from  Romans  xii,  12, 
"  Continuing  instant  in  prayer."  Here  the  term,  arpotfxaprepouvrss, 
is  very  energetic,  and  denotes,  as  Chrysostom  observes,  "  fervent, 
persevering,  and  earnest  prayer."  Our  Lord  also  delivered  a 
parable  to  teach  us  that  we  ought  "  to  pray  and  not  faint ;"  and 
we  have  examples  of  the  success  of  reiterating  our  petitions,  when 
for  some  time  they  appear  disregarded.  One  of  these  is  afforded  in 
the  case  of  the  woman  of  Canaan,  a  first  and  a  second  time 
repulsed  by  our  Lord;  and  another  occurs  in  2  Cor.  xii,  8,  0, 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  225 

"  For  this  I  besought  the  Lord  thrice  that  it  might  depart  from  me  ; 
and  he  said  unto  me,  My  grace  is  sufficient  for  thee,"  &c.  This 
passage  also  affords  an  instance  of  praying  distinctly  for  particular 
blessings,  a  practice  which  accords  also  with  the  direction  in  Phil, 
iv,  6,  to  make  our  "  requests  known  unto  God,"  which  includes 
not  only  our  desires  for  good  generally ;  but  also  those  particular 
requests  which  are  suggested  by  special  circumstances.  Direc- 
tions to  pray  for  national  and  public  blessings  occur  in  Psalm  cxxii, 
(i,  "  Pray  for  the  peace  of  Jerusalem,  they  shall  prosper  that  love 
thee  :"  in  Zech.  x,  1,  "Ask  ye  of  the  Lord  rain  in  the  time  of  thr 
latter  rain  ;  so  the  Lord  shall  make  bright  clouds,"  (or  lightnings,) 
"  and  give  them  showers  of  rain,  to  every  one  grass  in  the  field  :" 
in  1  Tim.  ii,  1-3,  "  I  exhort  therefore  that,  first  of  all,  supplica- 
tions, prayers,  intercessions,  and  giving  of  thanks,  be  made  for  all 
men  ;  for  kings,  and  for  all  that  are  in  authority,  that  we  may  lead 
a  quiet  and  peaceable  life  in  all  godliness  and  honesty ;  for  this  is 
good  and  acceptable  in  the  sight  of  God  our  Saviour,"  &c.  More 
particular  intercession  for  others  is  also  authorized  and  enjoined  : 
"  Peter  was  therefore  kept  in  prison  ;  but  prayer  was  made  withouf 
ceasing  of  the  Church  unto  God  for  him,"  Acts  xii,  5.  "  Now  1 
beseech  you,  brethren,  for  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ's  sake,  and  for 
the  love  of  the  Spirit,  that  ye  strive  together  with  me  in  your 
prayers  to  God  for  me ;  that  I  may  be  delivered  from  them  that 
do  not  believe  in  Judea,"  &c,  Rom.  xv,  30.  "  Confess  your  faults 
one  to  another,  and  pray  one  for  another,  that  ye  may  be  healed,'" 
James  v,  1G. 

It  follows,  therefore,  from  these  scriptural  passages,  that  prayer 
is  a  duty ;  that  it  is  made  a  condition  of  our  receiving  good  at  thf 
hand  of  God  ;  that  every  case  of  personal  pressure,  or  need,  mav 
be  made  the  subject  of  prayer ;  that  we  are  to  intercede  for  all 
Immediately  connected  with  us,  for  the  Church,  for  our  country, 
and  for  all  mankind ;  that  both  temporal  and  spiritual  blessings 
may  be  the  subject  of  our  supplications  ;  and  that  these  great  and 
solemn  exercises  are  to  be  accompanied  with  grateful  thanksgivings 
to  God  as  the  author  of  all  blessings  already  bestowed,  and  the 
benevolent  object  of  our  hope,  as  to  future  interpositions  and 
supplies.  Prayer,  in  its  particular  Christian  view,  is  briefly  and 
well  defined  in  the  Westminster  Catechism, — "  Prayer  is  the  offer- 
ing of  our  desires  to  God  for  things  agreeable  to  his  will,  in  the 
name  of  Christ,  with  confession  of  our  sins,  and  a  thankful  acknow- 
ledgment of  his  mercies." 

The  reason  on  which  this  great  and  efficacious  duty  rests,  has 
been  a  subjret  of  some  debate.     On  this  point,  however,  we  have 


226  '   THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

nothing  explicitly  stated  in  the  Scriptures.  From  them  we  learn 
only,  that  God  has  appointed  it ;  that  he  enjoins  it  to  be  offered  in 
faith,  that  is,  faith  in  Christ,  whose  atonement  is  the  meritorious 
and  procuring  cause  of  all  the  blessings  to  which  our  desires  can 
be  directed  ;  and  that  prayer  so  offered  is  an  indispensable  condi- 
tion of  our  obtaining  the  blessings  for  which  we  ask.  As  a  matter 
of  inference,  however,  we  may  discover  some  glimpses  of  the  reason 
in  the  Divine  Mind  on  which  its  appointment  rests.  That  reason 
has  sometimes  been  said  to  be  the  moral  preparation  and  state  oi 
fitness  produced  in  the  soul  for  the  reception  of  the  divine  mercies 
which  the  act,  and,  more  especially,  the  habit  of  prayer,  must 
induce.  Against  this  stands  the  strong  and,  in  a  scriptural  view, 
the  fatal  objection,  that  an  efficiency  is  thus  ascribed  to  the  mere 
act  of  a  creature  to  produce  those  great,  and  in  many  respects, 
radical  changes  in  the  character  of  man,  which  we  are  taught, 
by  inspired  authority,  to  refer  to  the  direct  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  What  is  it  that  fits  man  for  forgiveness,  but  simply  repent- 
ance 1  yet  that  is  expressly  said  to  be  the  "  gift3  of  Christ,  and 
supposes  strong  operations  of  the  illuminating  and  convincing  Spirit 
of  Truth,  the  Lord  and  Giver  of  spiritual  life  ;  and  if  the  mere  acts 
and  habit  of  prayer  had  efficiency  enough  to  produce  a  scriptural 
repentance,  then  every  formalist  attending  Avith  ordinary  seriousness 
to  his  devotions,  must  in  consequence,  become  a  penitent.  Again, 
if  we  pray  for  spiritual  blessings  aright,  that  is,  with  an  earnestness 
of  desire  which  arises  from  a  due  apprehension  of  their  importance, 
and  a  preference  of  them  to  all  earthly  good,  who  does  not  see  thai 
this  implies  such  a  deliverance  from  the  earthly  and  carnal  disposi- 
tion which  characterizes  our  degenerate  nature,  that  an  agency  far 
above  our  own,  however  we  may  employ  it,  must  be  supposed  ;  or 
else,  if  our  own  prayers  could  be  efficient  up  to  this  point,  we  might, 
by  the  continual  application  of  this  instrument,  complete  our  regen- 
eration, independent  of  that  grace  of  God,  which,  after  all,  this 
theory  brings  in.  It  may  indeed  be  said  that  the  grace  of  God 
operates  by' our  prayers  to  produce  in  us  a  state  of  moral  fitness  to 
receive  the  blessings  we  ask.  But  this  gives  up  the  point  contended 
for,  the  moral  efficiency  of  prayer ;  and  refers  the  efficiency  to 
another  agent  working  by  our  prayers  as  an  instrument.  Still, 
however,  it  may  be  affirmed,  that  the  Scriptures  nowhere  represent 
prayer  as  an  instrument  for  improving  our  moral  state,  though  in 
the  hands  of  divine  grace,  in  any  other  way  than  as  the  means  ot 
bringing  into  the  soul  new  supplies  of  spiritual  life  and  strength. 
It  is  therefore  more  properly  to  be  considered  as  a  condition  of  our 
"btaining  that  grace  by  which  such  effects  arc  wrought,  than  as 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  227 

the  instrument  by  which  it  effects  them.  In  fact,  all  genuine  acts 
of  prayer  depend  upon  a  grace  previously  bestowed,  and  from 
which  alone  the  disposition  and  the  power  to  pray  proceed.  So  it 
was  said  of  Saul  of  Tarsus,  "  Behold  he  prayeth  '"  He  prayed  in 
fact  then  for  the  first  time ;  but  that  was  in  consequence  of  the 
illumination  of  his  mind  as  to  his  spiritual  danger  effected  by  the 
miracle  on  the  way  to  Damascus,  and  the  grace  of  God  which 
accompanied  the  miracle.  Nor  does  the  miraculous  character  of 
the  means  by  which  conviction  was  produced  in  his  mind,  affect 
the  relevancy  of  this  to  ordinary  cases.  By  whatever  means  God 
may  be  pleased  to  fasten  the  conviction  of  our  spiritual  danger 
upon  our  minds,  and  to  awaken  us  out  of  the  long  sleep  of  sin,  that 
conviction  must  precede  real  prayer,  and  comes  from  the  influence 
of  his  grace,  rendering  the  means  of  conviction  effectual.  Thus  it 
is  not  the  prayer  which  produces  the  conviction,  but  the  conviction 
which  gives  birth  to  the  prayer ;  and  if  we  pursue  the  matter  into 
its  subsequent  stages,  we  shall  come  to  the  same  result.  We  pray 
for  what  we  feel  we  want ;  that  is,  for  something  not  in  our  pos- 
session ;  we  obtain  this  either  by  impartation  from  God,  to  whom 
we  look  up  as  the  only  Being  able  to  bestow  the  good  for  which 
we  ask  him  ;  or  else  we  obtain  it,  according  to  this  theory,  by  some 
moral  efficiency  being  given  to  the  exercise  of  praying  to  work  it 
in  us.  Now,  the  latter  hypothesis  is  in  many  cases  manifestly 
absurd.  We  ask  for  pardon  of  sin,  for  instance  ;  but  that  is  an  act 
of  God  done  for  us,  quite  distinct  from  any  moral  change  which 
prayer  may  be  said  to  produce  in  us,  whatever  efficiency  we  may 
ascribe  to  it ;  for  no  such  change  in  us  can  be  pardon,  since  that 
must  proceed  from  the  party  offended.  We  ask  for  increase  oi 
spiritual  strength  ;  and  prayer  is  the  expression  of  that  want.  But 
if  it  supply  this  want  by  its  own  moral  efficiency,  it  must  supply  it 
in  proportion  to  its  intensity  and  earnestness  ;  which  intensity  and 
earnestness  can  only  be  called  forth  by  the  degree  in  which  the 
want  is  felt,  so  that  the  case  supposed  is  contradictory  and  absurd, 
as  it  makes  the  sense  of  want  to  be  in  proportion  to  the  supply 
which  ought  to  abate  or  remove  it.  And  if  it  be  urged,  that  prayer 
at  least  produces  in  us  a  fitness  for  the  supply  of  spiritual  strength, 
because  it  is  excited  by  a  sense  of  our  wants,  the  answer  is,  that 
the  fitness  contended  for  consists  in  that  sense  of  want  itself,  which 
must  be  produced  in  us  by  the  previous  agency  of  grace,  or  we 
should  never  pray  for  supplies.  There  is,  in  fact,  nothing  in  prayer 
iimply  which  appears  to  have  any  adaptation,  as  an  instrument,  to 
effect  a  moral  change  in  man,  although  it  should  be  supposed  to  be- 
made  use  of  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.     The  word  of 


V2S  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES,  [PART 

God  is  properly  an  instrument,  because  it  contains  the  doctrine 
which  that  Spirit  explains  and  applies,  and  the  motives  to  faith  and 
obedience  which  he  enforces  upon  the  conscience  and  affections ; 
and  though  prayer  brings  these  truths  and  motives  before  us,  prayer 
cannot  properly  be  said  to  be  an  instrument  of  our  regeneration, 
because  that  which  is  thus  brought  by  prayer  to  bear  upon  our 
case  is  the  word  of  God  itself  introduced  into  our  prayers,  which 
derive  their  sole  influence  in  that  respect  from  that  circumstance. 
Prayer  simply  is  the  application  of  an  insufficient  to  a  sufficient 
Being  for  the  good  which  the  former  cannot  otherwise  obtain,  and 
which  the  latter  only  can  supply ;  and  as  that  supply  is  dependent 
upon  prayer,  and  in  the  nature  of  the  thing  consequent,  prayer  can 
in  no  good  sense  be  said  to  be  the  instrument  of  supplying  our 
wants,  or  fitting  us  for  their  supply,  except  relatively,  as  a  mere 
condition  appointed  by  the  donor. 

If  we  must  inquire  into  the  reason  of  the  appointment  of  prayer, 
and  it  can  scarcely  be  considered  as  a  purely  arbitrary  institution, 
that  reason  seems  to  be,  the  preservation  in  the  minds  of  men  of  a 
solemn  and  impressive  sense  of  God's  agency  in  the  world,  and  the 
dependence  of  all  creatures  upon  him.  Perfectly  pure  and  glorified 
beings,  no  longer  in  a  state  of  probation,  and  therefore  exposed  to 
no  temptations,  may  not  need  this  institution ;  but  men  in  their 
fallen  state  are  constantly  prone  to  forget  God ;  to  rest  in  the 
agency  of  second  causes ;  and  to  build  upon  a  sufficiency  in  them- 
selves. This  is  at  once  a  denial  to  God  of  the  glory  which  he 
rightly  claims,  and  a  destructive  delusion  to  creatures,  who,  in 
forsaking  God  as  the  object  of  their  constant  affiance,  trust  but  in 
broken  reeds,  and  attempt  to  drink  from  "  broken  cisterns  which 
can  hold  no  water."  It  is  then  equally  in  mercy  to  us,  as  in  respect 
to  his  own  honour  and  acknowledgment,  that  the  Divine  Being  has 
suspendcd  so  many  of  his  blessings,  and  those  of  the  highest  neces- 
sity to  us,  upon  the  exercise  of  prayer ;  an  act  which  acknowledges 
his  uncontrollable  agency,  and  the  dependence  of  all  creatures 
upon  him ;  our  insufficiency,  and  his  fulness ;  and  lays  the  founda- 
tion of  that  habit  of  gratitude  and  thanksgiving  which  is  at  once  so 
meliorating  to  our  own  feelings,  and  so  conducive  to  a  cheerful 
obedience  to  the  will  of  God.  And  if  this  reason  for  the  injunction 
of  prayer  is  nowhere  in  Scripture  stated  in  so  many  words,  it  is  a. 
principle  uniformly  supposed  as  the  foundation  of  the  whole  scheme 
of  religion  which  they  have  revealed. 

To  this  duty  objections  have  been  sometimes  offered,  at  which 
it  may  be  well  at  least  to  glance. 

One  has  been  grounded  upon  a  supposed  predestination  of  all 


IHIRD.]  1HL0L0GICAL   INSTITUTES.  229 

things  which  conic  to  pass ;  and  the  argument  is,  that  as  this  esta- 
blished predetermination  of  all  tilings  cannot  be  altered,  prayer, 
which  supposes  that  God  will  depart  from  it,  is  vain  and  useless. 
The  answer  which  a  pious  Predestinarian  would  give  to  this  objec- 
tion is,  That  the  argument  drawn  from  the  predestination  of  God 
lies  with  the  same  force  against  every  other  human  effort,  as  against 
prayer ;  and  that  as  God's  predetermination  to  give  food  to  man 
does  not  render  the  cultivation  of  the  earth  useless  and  imperti- 
nent, so  neither  does  the  predestination  of  things  shut  out  the 
iiecessity  and  efficacy  of  prayer.  It  would  also  be  urged,  that  God 
has  ordained  the  means  as  well  as  the  end ;  and  although  he  is  an 
unchangeable  Being,  it  is  a  part  of  the  unchangeable  system  which 
he  has  established,  that  prayer  shall  be  heard  and  accepted. 

Those  who  have  not  these  views  of  predestination  will  answer 
the  objection  differently  ;  for  if  the  premises  of  such  a  predestina- 
tion as  is  assumed  by  the  objection,  and  conceded  in  the  answer, 
be  allowed,  the  answer  is  unsatisfactory.  The  Scriptures  represent 
God,  for  instance,  as  purposing  to  inflict  a  judgment  upon  an  indi- 
vidual or  a  nation,  which  purpose  is  often  changed  by  prayer.  In 
this  case  either  God's  purpose  must  be  denied,  and  then  his  threat- 
enings  are  reduced  to  words  without  meaning ;  or  the  purpose 
must  be  allowed,  in  which  case  either  prayer  breaks  in  upon 
predestination,  if  understood  absolutely,  or  it  is  vain  and  useless 
To  the  objection  so  drawn  out  it  is  clear  that  no  answer  is  given 
by  saying  that  the  means  as  well  as  the  end  are  predestinated,  since 
prayer  in  such  cases  is  not  a  means  to  the  end,  but  an  instrument 
of  thwarting  it ;  or  is  a  means  to  one  end  in  opposition  to  another 
end,  which,  if  equally  predestinated  with  the  same  absoluteness,  is 
a  contradiction. 

The  true  answer  is,  that  although  God  has  absolutely  predeter- 
mined some  things,  there  are  others,  which  respect  his  government, 
of  free  and  accountable  agents,  which  he  has  but  conditionally 
predetermined.  The  true  immutability  of  God,  we  have  already 
showed,  (9)  consists,  not  in  his  adherence  to  his  purposes,  but  in 
his  never  changing  the  principles  of  his  administration ;  and  he  may 
therefore  in  perfect  accordance  with  his  preordination  of  things, 
and  the  immutability  of  his  nature,  purpose  to  do,  under  certain 
conditions  dependent  upon  the  free  agency  of  man,  what  he  will 
not  do  under  others  ;  and  for  this  reason,  that  an  immutable  adhe- 
rence to  the  principles  of  a  wise,  just,  and  gracious  government, 
requires  it.    Prayer  is  in  Scripture  made  one  of  these  conditions ; 

(0)  Part  II,  chap.  28. 

Vol.  III.  28 


330  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  if  God  has  established  it  as  one  of  the  principles  of  his  moral 
government  to  accept  prayer,  in  every  case  in  which  he  has  given 
us  authority  to  ask,  he  has  not,  we  may  be  assured,  entangled  hi? 
actual  government  of  the  world  with  the  bonds  of  such  an  eternal 
predestination  of  particular  events,  as  either  to  reduce  prayer  to  a 
mere  form  of  words,  or  not  to  be  able  himself,  consistently  with  his 
decrees,  to  answer  it,  whenever  it  is  encouraged  by  his  express 
engagements. 

A  second  objection  is,  that  as  God  is  infinitely  wise  and  good; 
his  wisdom  and  justice  will  lead  him  to  bestow  "  whatever  is  fit  for 
us  without  praying ;  and  if  any  thing  be  not  fit  for  us,  we  cannot 
obtain  it  by  praying."  To  this  Dr.  Paley  very  well  replies, (1)  "that 
it  may  be  agreeable  to  perfect  wisdom  to  grant  that  to  our  prayers, 
which  it  would  not  have  been  agreeable  to  the  same  wisdom  to  have 
given  us  without  praying  for."  This,  independent  of  the  question 
of  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures  which  explicitly  enjoin  prayer,  i« 
the  best  answer  which  can  be  given  to  the  objection ;  and  it  is  no 
small  confirmation  of  it,  that  it  is  obvious  to  every  reflecting  man. 
that  for  God  to  withhold  favours  till  asked  for,  "  tends,"  as  the  same 
writer  observes,  "  to  encourage  devotion  among  his  rational  crea- 
tures, and  to  keep  up  and  circulate  a  knowledge  and  sense  of  their 
dependency  upon  Him." 

But  it  is  urged,  "God  will  always  do  what  is  best  from  the  mora) 
perfection  of  his  nature,  whether  we  pray  or  not."    This  objection, 
however,  supposes  that  there  is  but  one  mode  of  acting  for  the  best, 
and  that  the  Divine  will  is  necessarily  determined  to  that  mode 
only ;  "  both  which  positions,"  says  Paley,  "  presume  a  knowledge 
of  universal  nature,  much  beyond  what  we  are  capable  of  attaining.5" 
It  is,  indeed,  a  very  unsatisfactory  mode  of  speaking,  to  say,  God 
will  always  do  what  is  best ;  since  we  can  conceive  him  capable  in 
all  cases  of  doing  what  is  still  better  for  the  creature,  and  also  that 
the  creature  is  capable  of  receiving  more  and  more  from  his  infinite 
fulness  for  ever.    All  that  can  be  rationally  meant  by  such  a  phrase 
is,  that,  in  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  God  will  always  do  what  is 
most  consistent  with  his  own  wisdom,  holiness,  and  goodness  ;  but 
fhen  the  disposition  to  pray,  and  the  act  of  praying,  add  a  new 
circumstance  to  every  case,  and  often  bring  many  other  new  cir- 
cumstances along  with  them.    It  supposes  humility,  contrition,  and 
trust,  on  the  part  of  the  creature  ;  and  an  acknowledgment  of  the 
power  and  compassion  of  God,  and  of  the  merit  of  the  atonement 
of  Christ :  all  which  are  manifestly  new  positions,  so  to  speak.  <>' 

(l)  Moral  Philosophy. 


IIHRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  231 

the  circumstances  of  the  creature,  which,  upon  the  very  principle 
of  the  objection,  rationally  understood,  must  be  taken  into  con- 
sideration. 

But  if  the  efficacy  of  prayer  as  to  ourselves  be  granted,  its 
influence  upon  the  case  of  others  is  said  to  be  more  difficult  to 
conceive.  This  may  be  allowed  without  at  all  affecting  the  duty. 
Those  who  bow  to  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  will  see,  that 
the  duty  of  praying  for  ourselves  and  for  others  rests  upon  the 
same  Divine  appointment ;  and  to  those  who  ask  for  the  reason  of 
such  intercession  in  behalf  of  others,  it  is  sufficient  to  reply,  that 
the  efficacy  of  prayer  being  established  in  one  case,  there  is  the 
•eame  reason  to  conclude  that  our  prayers  may  benefit  others,  as 
any  other  effort  we  may  use.  It  can  only  be  by  Divine  appoint- 
ment that  one  creature  is  made  dependent  upon  another  for  an) 
advantage,  since  it  was  doubtless  in  the  power  of  the  Creator  to 
have  rendered  each  independent  of  all  but  himsolf.  Whatever 
reason,  therefore,  might  lead  him  to  connect  and  interweave  the 
interests  of  one  man  with  the  benevolence  of  another,  will  be  the 
leading  reason  for  that  kind  of  mutual  dependence  which  is  implied 
in  the  benefit  of  mutual  prayer.  Were  it  only  that  a  previous  sym- 
pathy, charity,  and  good  will,  are  implied  in  the  duty,  and  must, 
indeed,  be  cultivated  in  order  to  it,  and  be  strengthened  by  it,  the 
wisdom  and  benevolence  of  the  institution  would,  it  is  presumed, 
be  apparent  to  every  well  constituted  mind.  That  all  prayer  for 
i  >thers  must  proceed  upon  a  less  perfect  knowledge  of  them  than 
we  have  of  ourselves,  is  certain :  that  all  our  petitions  must  be, 
oven  in  our  own  mind,  more  conditional  than  those  which  respect 
ourselves,  though  many  of  these  must  be  subjected  to  the  principles 
of  a  general  administration,  which  we  but  partially  apprehend  ;  and 
that  all  spiritual  influences  upon  others,  when  they  are  the  subject 
of  our  prayers,  will  be  understood  by  us  as  liable  to  the  control  of 
their  free  agency,  must  also  be  conceded ;  and,  therefore,  when 
others  are  concerned,  our  prayers  may  often  be  partially  or  wholly 
fruitless.  He  who  believes  the  Scriptures  will,  however,  be  encou- 
raged by  the  declaration,  that  "  the  effectual  fervent  prayer  of  a 
righteous  man,"  for  his  fellow  creatures,  "  availeth  much ;"  and  he 
who  demands  something  beyond  mere  authoritative  declaration,  as 
he  cannot  deny  that  prayer  is  one  of  those  instruments  by  which 
another  may  be  benefited,  must  acknowledge  that,  like  the  giving 
of  counsel,  it  may  be  of  great  utility  in  some  cases,  although  it 
should  fail  in  others  ;  and  that  as  no  man  can  tell  how  much  good 
counsel  may  influence  another,  or  in  many  cases  say  whether  it 
has  ultimately  failed  or  not,  so  it  is  with  prayer.    It  is  a  part  o! 


)332  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARi 

the  Divine  plan,  as  revealed  in  his  Word,  to  give  many  blessings 
to  man  independent  of  his  own  prayers,  leaving-  the  subsequent 
improvement  of  them  to  himself.  They  are  given  in  honour  of  thr 
intercession  of  Christ,  man's  great  "  Advocate ;"  and  they  are 
given,  subordinately,  in  acceptance  of  the  prayers  of  Christ's 
Church,  and  of  righteous  individuals.  And  when  many,  or  few. 
devout  individuals  become  thus  the  instruments  of  good  to  commu- 
nities, or  to  whole  nations,  there  is  no  greater  mystery  in  this  than 
in  the  obvious  fact,  that  the  happiness  or  misery  of  large  masses  of 
mankind  is  often  greatly  affected  by  the  wisdom  or  the  errors,  thf: 
skill  or  the  incompetence,  the  good  or  the  bad  conduct,  of  a  few 
persons,  and  often  of  one. 

The  general  duty  of  prayer  is  usually  distributed  into  four 
branches, — Ejaculatory,  Private,  Social,  and  Public;  each  of  which 
is  of  such  importance  as  to  require  a  separate  consideration. 

Ejaculatory  Prayer  is  the  term  given  to  those  secret  and 
frequent  aspirations  of  the  heart  to  God  for  general  or  particular 
blessings,  fey  which  a  just  sense  of  our  habitual  dependence  upon 
Q*kij  £*id  of  our  wants  and  dangers,  may  be  expressed,  at  those 
intervals  when  the  thoughts  can  detach  themselves  from  the  affairs 
of  life,  though  but  for  a  moment,  whilst  we  are  still  employed  in 
them.  It  includes,  too,  all  those  short  and  occasional  effusions  oi 
gratitude,  and  silent  ascriptions  of  praise,  which  the  remembrance 
of  God's  mercies  will  excite  in  a  devotional  spirit,  under  the  same 
circumstances.  Both,  however,  presuppose  what  Divines  have 
called,  "  the  spirit  of  prayer,"  which  springs  from  a  sense  of  our 
dependence  upon  God,  and  is  a  breathing  of  the  desires  after 
intercourse  of  thought  and  affection  with  Him,  accompanied  with  a 
reverential  and  encouraging  sense  of  his  constant  presence  with  us, 
The  cultivation  of  this  spirit  is  clearly  enjoined  upon  us  as  a  duty 
by  the  Apostle  Paul,  who  exhorts  us  to  "pray  without  ceasing, 
and  in  every  thing  give  thanks ;"  and  also  to  "  set  our  affections 
upon  things  above  ;" — exhortations  which  imply  a  holy  and  devo- 
tional frame  and  temper  of  mind,  and  not  merely  acts  of  prayer 
performed  at  intervals.  The  high  and  unspeakable  advantages 
of  this  habit,  are,  that  it  induces  a  watchful  and  guarded  mind ; 
prevents  religion  from  deteriorating  into  form  without  life  ;  unites 
the  soul  to  God,  its  light  and  strength ;  induces  continual  supplies 
of  Divine  influence ;  and  opposes  an  effectual  barrier,  by  the 
grace  thus  acquired,  against  the  encroachments  of  worldly  anxie- 
ties,  and  the  force  of  temptations.  The  existence  of  this  spirit  ot 
prayer  and  thanksgiving  is  one  of  the  grand  distinctions  between 
nominal  and  real  Christians ;  and  by  it  the  measure  of  vital  and 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  238 

effective  Christianity  enjoyed  by  any  individual  may  ordinarily  be 
determined. 

Private  Prayer.  This,  as  a  duty,  rests  upon  the  examples  of 
'.rood  men  in  Scripture ;  upon  several  passages  of  an  injunctive 
rharacter  in  the  Old  Testament;  and,  in  the  New,  upon  the 
express  words  of  our  Lord,  which,  whilst  they  suppose  the  prac- 
tice of  individual  prayer  to  have  been  generally  acknowledged  as 
obligatory,  enjoin  that  it  should  be  strictly  private.  "  But  thou, 
■when  thou  prayest,  enter  into  thy  closet,  (2)  and  when  thou  hast 
">b.ut  the  door,  pray  to  thy  Father  which  is  in  secret,  and  thy  Father 
which  seeth  in  secret  shall  reward  thee  openly."  In  this  respect, 
also,  Christ  has  himself  placed  us  under  the  obligation  of  his  own 
example ;  the  Evangelists  having  been  inspired  to  put  on  record 
several  instances  of  his  retirement  into  absolute  privacy,  that  he 
might  "  pray."  The  reason  for  this  institution  of  private  devotion 
appears  to  have  been  to  incite  us  to  a  friendly  and  confiding  inter- 
course with  God  in  all  those  particular  cases  which  most  concern 
our  feelings  and  our  interests ;  and  it  is  a  most  affecting  instance 
of  the  condescension  and  sympathy  of  God,  that  we  are  thus  allowed 
to  use  a  freedom  with  him,  in  "  pouring  out  our  hearts,"  which  we 
';ould  not  do  with  our  best  and  dearest  friends.  It  is  also  most 
worthy  of  our  notice,  that  when  this  duty  is  enjoined  upon  us  by 
our  Lord,  he  presents  the  Divine  Being  before  us  under  a  relation 
most  of  all  adapted  to  inspire  that  unlimited  confidence  with  which 
he  would  have  us  to  approach  him  : — "  Pray  to  thy  Father  which 
is  in  secret."  Thus  is  the  dread  of  his  Omniscience,  indicated  by 
Iiis  "  seeing  in  secret,"  and  of  those  other  overwhelming  attributes 
which  Omnipresence  and  Omniscience  cannot  fail  to  suggest, 
mitigated,  or  only  employed  to  inspire  greater  freedom,  and  a 
stronger  affiance. 

Family  Prayer.  Paley  states  the  peculiar  use  of  family  prayer 
1  o  consist  in  its  influence  upon  servants  and  children,  whose  atten- 
lion  may  be  more  easily  commanded  by  this  than  by  public  worship. 
"  The  example  and  authority  o(  a  master  and  father  act,  also,  in 
ihis  way  with  greater  force  ;  and  the  ardour  of  devotion  is  better 
.supported,  and  the  sympathy  more  easily  propagated  through  a 
small  assembly,  connected  by  the  affections  of  domestic  society, 
than  in  the  presence  of  a  mixed  congregation."  There  is,  doubt- 
less, weight  in  these  remarks ;  but  they  are  defective,  both  in  nor 
stating  the  obligation  of  this  important  duty,  and  in  not  fully 
exhibiting  its  advantages. 

(2)  Eif  to  rapauv.  Kuinoel  observes,  that  the  word  "answers  to  the  Hebrew 
--r"S'.  an  upper  room  set  apart  for  retirement  and  prayer,  anion?  the  Orientals." 

28* 


234  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [l?ART 

The  absence  of  an  express  precept  for  family  worship  has,  it  is 
true,  been  urged  against  its  obligation  even  by  some  who  have  still 
considered  it  as  a  prudential  and  useful  ordinance.  But  the  strict 
obligation  of  so  important  a  duty  is  not  to  be  conceded  for  a  moment, 
since  it  so  plainly  arises  out  of  the  very  constitution  of  a  family  ; 
and  is  confirmed  by  the  earliest  examples  of  the  Church  of  God. 
On  the  first  of  these  points  the  following  observations,  from  a  very 
able  and  interesting  work,  (3)  are  of  great  weight : — 

"  The  disposition  of  some  men,  professing  Christianity,  to  ask 
peremptorily  for  a  particular  precept  in  all  cases  of  incumbent  mora: 
duty,  is  one  which  every  Christian  would  do  well  to  examine  ;  not 
only  that  he  may  never  be  troubled  with  it  himself,  but  that  he  may 
be  at  no  loss  in  answering  such  a  man,  if  he  is  called  to  converse 
with  him.  The  particular  duty  to  which  he  refers, — say,  for  ex- 
ample, family  worship, — is  comparatively  of  small  account.  His 
question  itself  is  indicative  not  merely  of  great  ignorance ;  it  is 
symptomatic  of  the  want  of  religious  principle.  When  a  man  says 
ihat  he  can  only  be  bound  to  such  a  duty,  a  moral  duty,  by  a  posi- 
tive and  papticular  precept,  I  am  satisfied  that  he  could  not  perform 
it,  in  obedience  to  any  precept  whatever ;  nor  could  he  even  now, 
though  he  were  to  try.  The  truth  is,  that  this  man  has  no  dispo- 
sition towards  such  worship,  and  he  rather  requires  to  be  informed 
of  the  grounds  of  all  such  obligation. 

"The  duty  of  family  devotion,  therefore,  let  it  be  remembered, 
ihough  it  had  been  minutely  enjoined  as  to  both  substance  and 
season,  would  not,  after  all,  have  been  founded  only  on  such 
injunctions.  I  want  the  reader  thoroughly  to  understand  the 
character  of  a  Christian,  the  constitution  of  the  family ;  and  out 
of  this  character  and  that  constitution,  he  will  find  certain  duties 
to  arise  necessarily ;  that  is,  they  are  essential  to  the  continuance 
and  well-being  of  himself  as  a  Christian  parent,  and  of  the  consti- 
tution over  which  he  is  set.  In  this  case  there  can  be  no  question 
as  to  their  obligation,  and  for  a  precept  there  is  no  necessity.  The 
Almighty,  in  his  word,  has  not  only  said  nothing  in  vain,  but  nothing 
except  what  is  necessary.  Now,  as  to  family  worship,  for  a  parti- 
cular precept  I  have  no  wish ;  no,  not  even  for  the  sake  of  others, 
because  I  am  persuaded  that  the  Christian,  in  his  sober  senses,  will 
naturally  obey,  and  no  other  can. 

"  To  apply,  however,  this  request  for  a  precise  precept  to  some 
other  branches  of  family  duty:  What  would  be  thought  of  me,  were 
I  to  demand  an  express  precept  to  enforce  my  obligation  to  feed. 

(3)  Anderson  On  the  Domestic  Constitution. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  23s 

my  children,  and  another  to  oblige  me  to  clothe  them  1  one  to 
express  my  obligation  to  teach  them  the  use  of  letters,  and  anothei 
to  secure  my  training  them  to  lawful  or  creditable  professions  or 
employments?  'AH  this,'  very  properly  you  might  reply,  "  is  absurd 
in  the  highest  degree ;  your  obligation  rests  on  much  higher  ground ; 
nay,  doth  not  nature  itself  teach  you  in  this,  and  much  more  than 
this  1?  '  Very  true,'  I  reply  ;  '  and  is  renewed  nature,  then,  not  to 
teach  me  far  more  still  ?  To  what  other  nature  are  such  words  as 
these  addressed  ? —  Whatsover  things  are  true,  whatsoever  things  art 
honest,  ichatsoever  things  are  just,  whatsoever  things  are  pure,  what- 
soever things  are  lovely,  whatsoever  things  are  of  good  report,  if  then 
be  any  virtue,  and  if  there  be  any  praise,  think  on  these  things.'' 

"  Independently,  however,  of  all  this  evidence  with  any  rational 
Christian  parent,  I  may  confirm  and  establish  his  mind  on  much 
higher  ground  than  even  that  which  these  pointed  examples  afford. 
To  such  a  parent  I  might  say,  'Without  hesitation,  you  will  admit 
that  your  obligations  to  your  family  are  to  be  measured  now,  and 
on  the  day  of  final  account,  by  your  capacity, — as  a  man  by  your 
natural,  as  a  Christian  by  your  spiritual,  capacity  1  and,  however 
you  may  feel  conscious  of  falling  short  daily,  that  you  are  under 
obligation  to  honour  God  to  the  utmost  limit  of  this  capacity?  You 
will  also  allow  that,  standing  where  you  do,  you  are  not  now,  like  a 
solitary  orphan  without  relatives,  to  be  regarded  only  as  a  single  indi- 
vidual. God  himself,  your  Creator,  your  Saviour,  and  your  Judge, 
regards  you  as  the  head  of  a  family;  and,  therefore,  in  possession  oi 
a  sacred  trust ;  you  have  the  care  of  souls  ?  Now  if  you  really  do 
measure  obligation  by  capacity,  then  you  will  also  at  once  allow, 
that  you  must  do  what  you  can,  that  He  may,  from  your  family, 
have  as  much  honour  as  possible. 

"  '  Without  hesitation  you  will  also  allow  that  God  daily  preserve? 
you  ?  And  does  he  not  also  preserve  your  family  ?  But  if  he  pre- 
serves, he  has  a  right  of  property  in  each  and  all  under  your  roof 
Shall  He  not,  therefore,  have  from  you  acknowledgment  of  this  ? 
If  daily  he  preserves,  shall  he  not  be  daily  acknowledged?  And 
if  acknowledged  at  all,  how  ought  he  to  be  so,  if  not  upon  your 
knees  ?     And  how  can  they  know  this,  if  they  do  not  hear  it  ? 

"  '  Without  hesitation  you  will  also  allow  that  you  are  a  social 
as  well  as  a  reasonable  being?  And  often  have  you,  therefore, 
!  'It  how  much  the  soothing  influence  of  their  sweet  society  has 
-astained  you  under  your  cares  and  trials,  and  grief  itself.  O  ! 
surely  then,  as  a  social  being,  you  owe  to  them  social  worslnp  ;  nor 
-houkl  you  ever  forget,  that,  in  ancient  days,  there  teas  social  v,oi 
'hip  here  before  it  could  be  any  where  else.'" 


2&6  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

The  same  excellent  writer  has  not,  in  his  subsequent  argument, 
given  to  the  last  remark  in  the  above  quotation  all  the  force  which 
it  demands ;  for  that  social  worship  existed  before  worship  more 
properly  called  public,  that  is,  worship  in  indiscriminate  assemblies, 
is  the  point  which  when  followed  out,  most  fully  establishes  the 
obligation.  A  great  part,  at  least,  of  the  worship  of  the  patriarchal 
times  was  domestic.  The  worship  of  God  was  observed  in  the 
(amilies  of  Abraham,  Jacob,  and  Job ;  nay,  the  highest  species 
of  worship,  the  offering  of  sacrifices,  which  it  could  not  have 
been  without  Divine  appointment.  It  arose,  therefore,  out  of  the 
original  constitution  of  a  family,  that  the  father  and  natural  head 
was  invested  with  a  sacred  and  religious  character,  and  that  with 
reference  to  his  family ;  and  if  this  has  never  been  revoked  by 
subsequent  prohibition  ;  but  on  the  contrary,  if  its  continuance  has 
been  subsequently  recognised ;  then  the  family  priesthood  con- 
tinues in  force,  and  stands  on  the  same  ground  as  several  other 
religious  obligations,  which  have  passed  from  one  dispensation  oi 
vevealed  religion  to  another,  without  express  re-enactment. 

Let  us  then  inquire,  whether  any  such  revocation  of  this  office. 
as  originally  vested  in  the  father  of  a  family,  took  place  after  the 
appointment  of  a  particular  order  of  Priests  under  the  Mosaic 
economy.  It  is  true  that  national  sacrifices  were  offered  by  the 
Aaronical  Priests,  and  perhaps  some  of  those  consuetudinan 
sacrifices,  which,  in  the  patriarchal  ages,  were  offered  by  the  head.* 
of  families,  and  had  reference  specially  to  the  general  dispensation 
of  religion  under  which  every  family  was  equally  placed  ;  yet  the 
3  tassover  was  a  solemn  religious  act,  the  domestic  nature  of  which 
is  plainly  marked,  and  it  was  to  be  an  ordinance  for  ever,  and 
therefore  was  not  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the  heads  of  families 
by  the  institution  of  the  Aaronical  Priesthood,  although  the  cere- 
mony comprehended  several  direct  acts  of  worship.  The  solemn 
instruction  of  the  family  is  also  in  the  Law  of  Moses  enjoined  upon 
ihe  father,  "  Thou  shalt  teach  them  diligently  to  thy  children  ;w 
and  he  was  also  directed  to  teach  them  the  import  of  the  different 
festivals,  and  other  commemorative  institutions.  Thus  the  original 
relation  of  the  father  to  his  family,  which  existed  in  the  patriarchal 
age,  is  seen  still  in  existence,  though  changed  in  some  of  its  circum- 
stances by  the  law.  He  is  still  the  religious  teacher ;  still  he  offers 
prayers  for  them  to  God ;  and  still  "  blesses," — an  act  which 
imports  both  prayer,  praise,  and  official  benediction.  So  the  family 
of  Jesse  had  a  yearly  sacrifice,  1  Sam.  xx,  6.  So  David,  although 
not  a  Priest,  returned  to  "  bless  his  household ;"  and  our  Lord 
filled  the  office  of  the  master  of  a  family,  as  appears  from  his  eating 


VHIRU.J  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  237 

Hie  passover  with  his  disciples,  and  presiding  as  such  over  the 
whole  rite  :  And  although  the  passage,  "  Pour  out  thy  fury  upon 
the  Heathen,  and  upon  the  families  which  call  not  upon  thy  name,'* 
Jer.  x,  25,  docs  not  perhaps  decidedly  refer  to  acts  of  domestic 
worship,  yet  it  is  probable  that  the  phraseology  was  influenced  by 
i hat  practice  among  the  pious  Jews  themselves  ; — neither  did  the 
Heathen  nationally,  nor  in  their  families,  acknowledge  God.  Nor 
is  it  a  trifling  confirmation  of  the  ancient  practice  of  a  formal  and 
visible  domestic  religion,  that  in  Paganism,  which  corrupted  the 
forms  of  the  true  religion,  and  especially  those  cf  the  patriarchal 
dispensation,  we  see  the  signs  of  a  family  as  well  as  a  public 
idolatry,  as  exhibited  in  their  private  "  chambers  of  imagery,"  their 
household  deities ;  and  the  religious  ceremonies  which  it  was 
incumbent  upon  the  head  of  every  house  to  perform. 

The  sacred  character  and  office  of  the  father  and  master  of  a 
household,  passed  from  Judaism  into  Christianity ;  for  here,  also, 
we  find  nothing  which  revokes  and  repeals  it.  A  duty  so  well 
understood  both  among  Jews  and  even  Heathens,  as  that  the  head 
of  the  house  ought  to  influence  its  religious  character,  needed  no 
■special  injunction.  The  father  or  master  who  believed  was  bap- 
tized, and  all  his  "  house  ;"  the  first  religious  societies  were  chiefly 
domestic  ;  and  the  antiquity  of  domestic  religious  services  among* 
Christians,  leaves  it  unquestionable,  that,  when  the  number  of 
Christians  increased  so  as  to  require  a  separate  assembly  in  some 
common  room  or  church,  the  domestic  worship  was  not  superseded. 
But  for  the  division  of  verses  in  the  fourth  chapter  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Colossians,  it  would  scarcely  have  been  suspected  that  the 
first  and  second  verses  contained  two  distinct  and  unconnected 
precepts, — "  Masters,  give  unto  your  servants  that  which  is  just 
and  equal,  knowing  that  ye  also  have  a  Master  in  heaven ;  con- 
tinue in  prayer,  and  watch  in  the  same  with  thanksgiving;"  a 
collocation  of  persons  and  duties  which  seems  to  intimate  that  the 
sense  of  the  Apostle  was,  that  the  "  servant,"  the  slave,  should 
partake  of  the  benefit  of  those  continual  prayers  and  daily  thanks- 
givings which  it  is  enjoined  upon  the  master  to  offer. 

As  the  obligation  to  this  branch  of  devotion  is  passed  over  by 
Paley,  so  the  advantages  of  family  worship  are  but  very  imperfectly 
stated  by  him.  The  offering  of  prayer  to  God  in  a  family  cannot 
but  lay  the  ground  of  a  special  regard  to  its  interests  and  concerns 
on  the  part  of  Him,  who  is  thus  constantly  acknowledged  ;  and 
the  advantage,  therefore,  is  more  than  a  mere  sentimental  one : 
and  more  than  that  of  giving  effect  to  the  "  master's  example/' 
The  blessings  of  providence  and  of  grace  ;  defence  against  evil,  or 


238  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

peculiar  supports  under  it ;  may  thus  be  expected  from  Him,  who 
has  said,  "  In  all  thy  ways  acknowledge  him,  and  He  shall  direct 
thy  paths  ;"  and  that  when  two  or  three  are  met  in  his  name,  He 
is  "  in  the  midst  of  them."  The  family  is  a  "  church  in  a  house  ;" 
and  its  ministrations,  as  they  are  acceptable  to  God,  cannot  but 
be  followed  by  his  direct  blessing1. 

Public  Prayer,  under  which  we  include  the  assembling  of 
ourselves  together  for  every  branch  of  public  worship. 

The  scriptural  obligation  of  this  is  partly  founded  upon  example, 
and  partly  upon  precept;  so  that  no  person  who  admits  that 
authority,  can  question  this  great  duty  without  manifest  and 
criminal  inconsistency.  The  institution  of  public  worship  under 
/lie  law  ;  the  practice  of  synagogue  worship  among  the  Jews,  from 
at  least  the  time  of  Ezra, (4)  cannot  be  questioned;  both  which 
were  sanctioned  by  the  practice  of  our  Lord  and  his  Apostles. 
The  course  of  the  synagogue  worship  became  indeed  the  model 
of  that  of  the  Christian  Church,  it  consisted  in  prayer,  reading 
and  explaining  the  Scriptures,  and  singing  of  psalms  ;  and  thus  one 
of  the  most  important  means  of  instructing  nations,  and  of  spread- 
ing and  maintaining  the  influence  of  morals  and  religion  among  a 
people,  passed  from  the  Jews  into  all  Christian  countries. 

The  preceptive  authority  for  our  regular  attendance  upon  public 
worship,  is  either  inferential  or  direct.  The  command  to  publish 
the  Gospel  includes  the  obligation  of  assembling  to  hear  it ;  the 
name  by  which  a  Christian  society  is  designated  in  Scripture,  is  a 
Church ;  which  signifies  an  "  assembly"  for  the  transaction  of  some 
business ;  and,  in  the  case  of  a  Christian  assembly,  the  business 
must  be  necessarily  spiritual,  and  include  the  sacred  exercises  of 
prayer,  praise,  and  hearing  the  Scriptures.  But  we  have  more 
direct  precepts,  although  the  practice  was  obviously  continued  from 
Judaism,  and  was  therefore  consuetudinary.  Some  of  the  Epistles 
of  Paul  are  commanded  to  be  read  in  the  Churches.  The  singing 
of  psalms,  hymns,  and  spiritual  songs,  is  enjoined  as  an  act  of 
solemn  worship  "  to  the  Lord  ;"  and  St.  Paul  cautions  the  Hebrews 
*hat  they  "forsake  not  the  assembling  of  themselves  together.'" 
The  practice  of  the  primitive  age  is  also  manifest  from  the  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul.  The  Lord's  Supper  was  celebrated  by  the  body  ol 
believers  collectively;  and  this  Apostle  prescribes  to  the  Corinthians 
regulations  for  the  exercises  of  prayer  and  prophesyings,  "  when 
they  came  together  in  the  church," — the  assembly.     The  stated^ 

(4)  Some  writers  contend  that  synagogues  were  as  old  as  the  ceremonial  law. 
That  they  were  ancient  is  proved  from  Acts  xv,  21, — "Moses  of  old  time  hath  hi 
cyery  city  them  that  preach  him,  being  read  in  the  synagogues  every  Sabbath  day.'1 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  230 

ness  and  order  of  these  "holy  offices"  in  the  primitive  Church, 
appears  also  from  the  Apostolical  Epistle  of  St.  Clement :  "  We 
ought  also,  looking  into  the  depths  of  the  Divine  knowledge,  to  do 
all  things  in  order,  whatsoever  the  Lord  hath  commanded  to  be 
done.  We  ought  to  make  our  oblations,  and  perform  our  holy 
offices,  at  their  appointed  seasons ;  for  these  he  hath  commanded 
to  be  done,  not  irregularly  or  by  chance,  but  at  determinate  times 
and  hours ;  as  he  hath  likewise  ordained  by  his  Supreme  Will, 
where,  and  by  what  persons,  they  shall  be  performed  ;  that  so  all 
filings  being  done  according  to  his  pleasure,  may  be  acceptable 
in  his  sight."  This  passage  is  remarkable  for  urging  a  Divine 
authority  for  the  public  services  of  the  Church,  by  which  St, 
Clement,  no  doubt,  means  the  authority  of  the  inspired  directions 
of  the  Apostles. 

The  ends  of  the  institution  of  public  worship  are  of  such  obvious 
importance,  that  it  must  ever  be  considered  as  one  of  the  most 
condescending  and  gracious  dispensations  of  God  to  man.  By  this 
his  Church  confesses  his  name  before  the  world ;  by  this  the  public 
teaching  of  his  word  is  associated  with  acts  calculated  to  affect  the 
mind  with  that  solemnity  which  is  the  best  preparation  for  hearing 
it  to  edification.  It  is  thus  that  the  ignorant  and  vicious  are  col- 
lected together,  and  instructed  and  warned ;  the  invitations  oil 
mercy  are  published  to  the  guilty,  and  the  sorrowful  and  afflicted 
are  comforted.  In  these  assemblies  God,  by  his  Holy  Spirit,  diffuses 
his  vital  and  sanctifying  influence,  and  takes  the  devout  into  a  fel- 
lowship with  himself,  from  which  they  derive  strength  to  do  and  to 
suffer  his  will  in  the  various  scenes  of  life,  whilst  he  thus  affords 
them  a  foretaste  of  the  deep  and  hallowed  pleasures  which  are 
reserved  for  them  at  "  his  right  hand  for  evermore."  Prayers  and 
intercessions  are  here  heard  for  national  and  public  interests  ;  and 
whilst  the  benefit  of  these  exercises  descends  upon  a  country,  al< 
are  kept  sensible  of  the  dependence  of  every  public  and  persona! 
interest  upon  God.  Praise  Calls  forth  the  grateful  emotions,  and 
gives  cheerfulness  to  piety ;  and  that  "  instruction  in  righteous- 
ness," which  is  so  perpetually  repeated,  diffuses  the  principles  oi 
morality  and  religion  throughout  society ;  enlightens  and  gives 
activity  to  conscience ;  raises  the  standard  of  morals ;  attaches 
shame  to  vice,  and  praise  to  virtue  ;  and  thus  exerts  a  powerfully 
purifying  influence  upon  mankind.  Laws  thus  receive  a  force, 
which,  in  other  circumstances,  they  could  not  acquire,  even  were 
they  enacted  in  as  great  perfection ;  and  the  administration  ol 
justice  is  aided  by  the  strongest  possible  obligation  and  sanction 
being  given  to  legal  oaths.    The  domestic  relations  are  rendered 


240  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES,  [PARI 

more  strong  and  interesting  by  the  very  habit  of  the  attendance  of 
families  upon  the  sacred  services  of  the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord ; 
and  the  rich  and  the  poor  meeting  together  there,  and  standing  on 
the  same  common  ground  of  sinners  before  God,  equally  depend- 
ent upon  him,  and  equally  suing  for  his  mercy,  has  a  powerful, 
though  often  an  insensible,  influence  in  humbling  the  pride  which 
is  nourished  by  superior  rank,  and  in  raising  the  lower  classes 
above  abjectness  of  spirit,  without  injuring  their  humility.  Piety, 
benevolence,  and  patriotism,  are  equally  dependent  for  their  purity 
and  vigour  upon  the  regular  and  devout  worship  of  God  in  the 
simplicity  of  the  Christian  dispensation. 

A  few  words  on  liturgies  or  forms  of  prayer  may  here  have  a 
proper  place. 

The  necessity  of  adhering  to  the  simplicity  of  the  first  age  of  the 
Church,  as  to  worship,  need  scarcely  be  defended  by  argument. 
If  no  liberty  were  intended  to  be  given  to  accommodate  the  modes 
of  worship  to  the  circumstances  of  different  people  and  times,  we 
should,  no  doubt,  have  had  some  express  directory  on  the  subject 
in  Scripture  ;  but  in  the  exercise  of  this  liberty  steady  regard  is  to 
be  paid  to  the  spirit  and  genius  and  simple  character  of  Christian- 
ity, and  a  respectful  deference  to  the  practice  of  the  Apostles  and 
their  immediate  successors.  Without  these,  formality  and  supersti- 
tion, to  both  of  which  human  nature  is  very  liable,  are  apt  to  be 
induced  ;  and  when  once  they  enter  they  increase,  as  the  history 
of  the  Church  sufficiently  shows,  indefinitely,  until  true  religion  is 
buried  beneath  the  mass  of  observances  which  have  been  introduced 
as  her  aids  and  handmaids.  Our  Lord's  own  words  are  here  directly 
applicable  and  important :  "  God  is  a  Spirit ;  and  they  that  worshij  • 
him,  must  worship  him  in  spirit  and  in  truth."  The  worship  must 
be  adapted  to  the  spiritual  nature  of  God,  and  to  his  revealed  per 
lections.  To  such  a  Being  the  number  of  prayers,  the  quantity  of 
worship  so  to  speak,  to  which  corrupt  Churches  have  attached  60 
much  importance,  can  be  of  no  value.  As  a  Spirit,  he  seeks  the 
worship  of  the  spirit  of  man  ;  and  regards  nothing  external  in  that 
worship  but  as  it  is  the  expression  of  those  emotions  of  humility, 
faith,  gratitude,  and  hope,  which  are  the  principles  he  condescend- 
ingly approves  in  man.  "  True"  worship,  we  are  also  taught  by 
these  words,  is  the  worship  of  the  heart ;  it  springs  from  humility, 
faith,  gratitude,  and  hope  ;  and  its  final  cause,  or  end,  is  to  better 
man,  by  bringing  upon  his  aifections  the  sanctifying  and  comfort- 
ing influence  of  grace.  The  modes  of  worship  which  best  promote 
this  end,  and  most  effectually  call  these  principles  into  exercise,  are 
ihose  therefore  which  best  accord  with  our  Lord's  rule :  and  if  hi 


!HIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  241 

the  Apostolic  age  we  see  this  end  of  worship  most  directly  accom- 
plished, and  these  emotions  most  vigorously  and  with  greatest 
purity  excited,  the  novelties  of  human  invention  can  add  nothing 
to  the  effect,  and  for  that  very  reason  have  greatly  diminished  it. 
In  the  Latin  and  Greek  Churches  we  see  a  striking  conformity  in 
the  vestments,  the  processions,  the  pictures,  and  images,  and  other 
parts  of  a  complex  and  gorgeous  ceremonial,  to  the  Jewish  typical 
worship,  and  to  that  of  the  Gentiles,  which  was  an  imitation  of  it 
without  typical  meaning.  But  it  is  not  even  pretended  that  in  these 
circumstances  it  is  founded  upon  primitive  practice  ;  or,  if  pretend- 
ed, this  is  obviously  an  impudent  assumption. 

Liturgies,  or  forms  of  Service,  do  not  certainly  come  under  this 
censure,  except  when  they  contain  superstitious  acts  of  devotion 
to  saints,  or  are  so  complicated,  numerous,  and  lengthened,  that 
the  only  principle  to  which  they  can  be  referred  is  the  common, 
but  unworthy  notion,  that  the  Divine  Being  is  rendered  placable  by 
continued  service ;  or  that  the  wearisome  exercise  of  voeal  prayers, 
continued  for  long  periods,  and  in  painful  postures,  is  a  necessary 
penance  to  man,  and,  as  such,  acceptable  to  God.  In  those  Re^ 
formed  Churches  of  Christendom  in  which  they  are  used,  they  have 
been  greatly  abridged,  as  well  as  purified  from  the  corruptions  oi 
the  middle  ages.  In  some  they  are  more  copious  than  in  others, 
whilst  many  religious  societies  have  rejected  their  use  altogether ; 
and  in  a  few  they  are  so  used  as  to  afford  competent  space  also  for 
extempore  devotion. 

The  advocates  and  opponents  of  the  use  of  forms  of  prayer  hi 
public  worship  have  both  run  into  great  extremes,  and  attempted 
generally  to  prove  too  much  against  each  other. 

If  the  use  of  forms  of  prayer  in  prose  be  objected  to,  their  use 
in  verse  ought  to  be  rejected  on  the  same  principle ;  and  extem- 
poraneous psalms  and  hymns  must,  for  consistency's  sake,  be 
required  of  a  Minister,  as  well  as  extemporaneous  prayers  ;  or  the 
practice  of  singing,  as  a  part  of  God's  worship,  must  be  given  up. 
Again  :  If  the  objection  to  the  use  of  a  form  of  prayer  be  not  in  its 
matter  ;  but  merely  as  it  contains  petitions  not  composed  by  our- 
selves, or  by  the  officiating  Minister  on  the  occasion ;  the  same 
objection  would  lie  to  our  using  any  petitions  found  in  the  Psalms 
or  other  devotional  parts  of  Scripture,  although  adapted  to  our  case, 
and  expressed  in  words  far  more  fitting  than  our  own.  If  we  think 
precompo'sed  prayers  incompatible  with  devotion,  we  make  it 
essential  to  devotion  that  we  should  frame  our  desires  into  our  own 
words  ;  whereas  nothing  can  be  more  plain,  than  that  whoever  has 
composed  the  words,  if  they  correspond  with  our  desires,  they 

Vol.  III.  29 


242  1HE0L0GICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PAIt  I 

become  the  prayer  of  our  hearts,  and  are,  as  such,  acceptable  to 
God.  The  objection  to  petitionary  forms  composed  by  others,  sup- 
poses also  that  we  know  the  things  which  it  is  proper  for  us  to  ask 
without  the  assistance  of  others.  This  may  be  sometimes  the  case  ; 
but  as  we  must  be  taught  what  to  pray  for  by  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
so,  in  proportion  as  we  understand  what  we  are  authorized  to  pray 
for  by  those  Scriptures,  our  prayers  become  more  varied,  and  dis- 
tinct, and  comprehensive,  and,  therefore,  edifying.  But  all  helps 
to  the  understanding  of  the  Scriptures,  as  to  what  they  encourage 
us  to  ask  of  God,  is  a  help  to  us  in  prayer.  Thus  the  exposition  of 
Christian  privileges  and  blessings  from  the  pulpit,  affords  us  this 
assistance  ;  thus  the  public  extempore  prayers  we  hear  offered  by 
Ministers  and  enlightened  Christians,  assist  us  in  the  same  respect ; 
and  the  written  and  recorded  prayers  of  the  wise  and  pious  in  dif- 
ferent ages,  fulfil  the  same  office,  and  to  so  great  an  extent,  that 
scarcely  any  who  offer  extempore  prayer  escape  falling  into  phrases 
and  terms  of  expression,  or  even  entire  petitions,  which  have  been 
originally  derived  from  Liturgies.  Even  in  extempore  services,  the 
child  accustomed  to  the  modes  of  precatory  expression  used  by  the 
parent,  and  the  people  to  those  of  their  Ministers,  imitate  them 
unconsciously ;  finding  the  desires  of  their  hearts  already  embodied 
in  suitable  and  impressive  words. 

The  objection,  therefore,  to  the  use  of  forms  of  prayer,  when 
absolute,  is  absurd,  and  involves  principles  which  no  one  acts  upon, 
or  can  act  upon.  It  also  disregards  example  and  antiquity.  The 
High  Priest  of  the  Jews  pronounced  yearly  a  form  of  benediction. 
The  Psalms  of  David,  and  other  inspired  Hebrew  Poets,  whether 
chanted  or  read  makes  no  difference,  were  composed  for  the  use 
of  the  sanctuary,  and  formed  a  part  of  the  regular  devotions  of  the 
people.  Forms  of  prayer  were  used  in  the  synagogue  service  of 
the  Jews,  which,  though  multiplied  in  subsequent  times,  so  as  to 
render  the  service  tedious  and  superstitious,  had  among  them  some 
that  were  in  use  between  the  return  from  the  Captivity  and  the 
Christian  era,  and  were  therefore  sanctioned  by  the  practice  of 
our  Lord  and  his  Apostles.  (5)  John  Baptist  appears  also  to  have 
given  a  form  of  prayer  to  his  disciples,  in  which  he  was  followed 
by  our  Lord.  The  latter  has  indeed  been  questioned,  and  were  it 
to  be  argued  that  our  Lord  intended  that  form  of  prayer  alone  to 
be  used,  too  much  would  be  proved  by  the  advocates  of  forms, 
On  the  other  hand,  although  the  words,  "  after  this  manner  pray 
ye,"  intimate  that  the  Lord's  Prayer  was  given  as  a  model  of  prayer. 

(5)  PrideaI-x's  Connexion.    Fol.  Edit.  vol.  i,  p.  °>04. 


1HIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  243 

so  the  words  in  another  Evangelist,  "When  ye  pray,  say,"  as  fully 
indicate  an  intention  to  prescribe  a  form.  It  seems,  therefore,  fair, 
to  consider  the  Lord's  Prayer  as  intended  both  as  a  model  and  a 
form;  and  he  must  be  very  fastidious  who,  though  he  uses  it  as 
the  model  of  his  own  prayers,  by  paraphrasing  its  petitions  in  his 
own  words,  should  scruple  to  use  it  in  its  native  simplicity  and 
force  as  a  form.  That  its  use  as  a  form,  though  not  its  exclusive 
use,  was  originally  intended  by  our  Lord,  appears,  I  think,  very 
clearly,  from  the  disciples  desiring  to  be  taught  to  pray,  "  as  John 
taught  his  disciples."  If,  as  it  has  been  alleged,  the  Jewish  Rab- 
bies,  at  so  early  a  period,  were  in  the  custom  of  giving  short  forms 
of  prayer  to  their  disciples,  to  be  used  in  the  form  given,  or  to  be 
enlarged  upon  by  the  pupil  at  his  pleasure,  this  would  fully  explain 
the  request  of  the  disciples.  However,  without  laying  much  stress 
upon  the  antiquity  of  this  practice,  we  may  urge,  that  if  John  Bap- 
tist gave  a  form  of  prayer  to  his  followers,  the  conduct  of  our  Lord 
in  teaching  his  disciples  to  pray,  by  what  is  manifestly  a  regularly 
connected  series  of  petitions,  is  accordant  with  their  request ;  but 
if  the  Baptist  only  taught  what  topics  ought  to  be  introduced  in 
prayer,  and  the  disciples  of  Jesus  wished  to  be  instructed  in  like 
manner,  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  their  request  being  granted,  not 
by  his  giving  directions  as  to  the  topics  of  prayer,  but  by  his  utter- 
ing a  regular  prayer  itself.  That  our  Lord  intended  that  prayer  to 
be  used  as  adapted  to  that  period  of  his  dispensation  ;  and  that  the 
petitions  in  that  form  are  admirably  applicable  to  every  period  of 
Christianity,  and  may  be  used  profitably ;  and  that  its  use  implies 
a  devout  respect  to  the  words  of  Him  "  who  spake  as  never  man 
spake  ;"  are  points  from  which  there  does  not  appear  any  reason- 
able ground  of  dissent 

The  practice  of  the  primitive  Church  may  also  be  urged  in 
favour  of  Liturgies.  Founded  as  the  early  worship  of  Christians 
■was,  upon  the  model  of  the  synagogue,  the  use  of  short  forms  of 
prayer,  or  collects,  by  them,  is  at  least  probable.  It  must  indeed 
be  granted  that  extended  and  regular  Liturgies  were  of  a  later 
date  ;  and  that  extempore  prayers  were  constantly  offered  in  their 
assemblies  for  public  worship.  This  appears  clear  enough  from 
several  passages  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  and  the  writings  of  the 
Fathers  ;  so  that  no  liturgical  service  can  be  so  framed  as  entirely 
to  shut  out,  or  not  to  leave  convenient  space  for,  extempore 
prayer  by  the  Minister  without  departing  from  the  earliest  models. 
But  the  Lord's  Prayer  appears  to  have  been  in  frequent  use  in  the 
earliest  times,  and  a  series  of  collects ;  which  seems  allowed  even 
by  Lord  King,  although  he  proves  that  the  practice  for  the  Minister 


244  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

to  pray  "according  to  his  ability," (6)  that  is,  to  use  his  gifts  in 
extempore  prayer,  was  a  constant  part  of  the  public  worship  in 
the  first  ages. 

Much,  therefore,  is  evidently  left  to  wisdom  and  prudence  in  a 
case  where  we  have  no  explicit  direction  in  the  Scriptures  ;  and  as 
a  general  rule  to  be  modified  by  circumstances,  we  may  perhaps 
with  safety  affirm,  that  the  best  mode  of  public  worship  is  that 
which  unites  a  brief  scriptural  Liturgy  with  extempore  prayers  by 
the  Minister.  This  will  more  clearly  appear  if  we  consider  the 
exceedingly  futile  character  of  those  objections  which  have  been 
reciprocally  employed  by  the  opponents  and  advocates  of  forms, 
when  they  have  carried  their  views  to  an  extreme. 

To  public  Liturgies  it  has  been  objected,  that  "  forms  of  prayer 
composed  in  one  age  become  unfit  for  another,  by  the  unavoidable 
change  of  language,  circumstances  and  opinions."  To  this  ii 
may  be  answered,  1.  That  whatever  weight  there  may  be  in  the 
objection,  it  can  only  apply  to  cases  where  the  form  is,  in  all  its 
parts,  made  imperative  upon  the  officiating  Minister ;  or  where  the 
Church  imposing  it,  neglects  to  accommodate  the  Liturgy  to  meet 
all  such  changes,  when  innocent.  2.  That  the  general  language 
of  no  form  of  prayer  among  ourselves,  has  become  obsolete  in 
point  of  fact ;  a  few  expressions  only  being,  according  to  modern 
notions,  uncouth,  or  unusual.  3.  That  the  petitions  they  contain 
are  suited,  more  or  less,  to  all  men  at  all  times,  whatever  may  be 
their  "  circumstances ;"  and  that  as  to  "  opinions,"  if  they  so 
change  in  a  Church  as  to  become  unscriptural,  it  is  an  advantage 
arising  out  of  a  public  form,  that  it  is  auxiliary  to  the  Scriptures  in 
bearing  testimony  against  them  ;  that  a  natural  reverence  for 
ancient  forms  tends  to  preserve  their  use,  after  opinions  have 
become  lax ;  and  that  they  are  sometimes  the  means  of  recovering 
a  Church  from  error. 

Another  objection  is,  that  the  perpetual  repetition  of  the  same 
form  of  words  produces  weariness  and  inattentiveness  in  the  con- 
gregation. There  is  some  truth  in  this;  but  it  is  often  carried 
much  too  far.  A  devotional  mind  will  not  weary  in  the  repetition 
of  a  scriptural  and  well-arranged  Liturgy,  if  not  too  long  to  be 
sustained  by  the  infirmity  of  the  body.  Whether  forms  are  used, 
or  extempore  prayer  be  practised,  effort  and  application  of  mind 
are  necessary  in  the  hearer  to  enter  into  the  spirit  of  the  words  ; 
and  each  mode  is  wearisome  to  the  careless  and  indevout,  though 
not,  we  grant,  in  equal  degrees.     The  objection,  as  far  as  it  has 

(6)   This  expression  occurs  in  Justin  Martyr's  Second  Apology,  whprt  h* 
particularly  describes  the  mode  of  primitive  worship. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  246 

any  weight,  would  be  reduced  to  nothing,  were  the  Liturgy 
repeated  only  at  one  service  on  the  Sabbath,  so  that  at  the  others 
the  Minister  might  be  left  at  liberty  to  pray  with  more  direct 
reference  to  the  special  circumstances  of  the  people,  the  Church, 
and  the  world. 

The  general  character  which  all  forms  of  prayer  must  take,  is  a 
third  objection  ;  but  this  is  not  true  absolutely  of  any  Liturgy,  and 
much  less  of  that  of  the  Church  of  England.  All  prayer  must, 
rind  ought  to  be,  general,  because  we  ask  for  blessings  which  all 
others  need  as  much  as  ourselves ;  but  that  particularity  which 
goes  into  the  different  parts  of  a  Christian's  religious  experience 
ind  conflicts,  dangers  and  duties,  is  found  very  forcibly  and  feel- 
ingly expressed  in  that  Liturgy.  That  greater  particularity  is  often 
needed  than  this  excellent  form  of  prayer  contains,  must,  however, 
he  allowed  ;  and  this,  as  well  as  prayer  suited  to  occasional  circum- 
stances, might  be  supplied  by  the  more  frequent  use  of  extempore 
prayer,  without  displacing  the  Liturgy  itself.  The  objection,  there- 
fore, has  no  force,  except  when  extempore  prayer  is  excluded,  or 
confined  within  too  narrow  a  limit. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  indiscriminate  advocates  of  Liturgies 
have  carried  their  objections  to  extempore  prayer  to  a  very  absurd 
extreme.  Without  a  Liturgy  the  folly  and  enthusiasm  of  many, 
they  say,  is  in  danger  of  producing  extravagant  or  impious  addresses 
to  God ;  that  a  congregation  is  confused  between  their  attention 
to  the  Minister,  and  their  own  devotion,  being  ignorant  of  each 
petition  before  they  hear  it ;  and  to  this  they  add  the  labouring 
i-ecollection  or  tumultuous  delivery  of  many  extempore  speakers. 
The  first  and  third  of  these  objections  can  have  force  only  where 
;'oolish,  enthusiastic,  and  incompetent  Ministers  are  employed  ; 
and  so  the  evil,  which  can  but  rarely  exist,  is  easily  remedied. 
The  second  objection  lay  as  forcibly  against  the  inspired  prayers 
of  the  Scriptures  at  the  time  they  were  first  uttered,  as  against 
ex  tempore  prayers  now ;  and  it  would  lie  against  the  use  of  the 
collects,  and  occasional  unfamiliar  forms  of  prayer  introduced  into 
the  regular  Liturgy,  in  the  case  of  all  who  are  not  able  to  read,  or 
who  happen  not  to  have  Prayerbooks.  We  may  also  observe, 
that  if  evils  of  so  serious  a  kind  are  the  necessary  results  of  extem- 
pore praying ;  if  devotion  is  hindered,  and  pain  and  confusion  of 
mind  produced  ;  and  impiety  and  enthusiasm  promoted  ;  it  is  rather 
singular  that  extempore  prayer  should  have  been  so  constantly 
practised  in  the  primitive  Church,  and  that  it  should  not  have  been 
wholly  prohibited  to  the  Clergy  on  all  occasions,  in  later  times. 
The  facts,  however,  of  our  own  age  prove  that  there  is,  to  say  the 

29* 


24&  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

least,  an  equal  degree  of  devotion,  an  equal  absence  of  confused- 
ness  of  thought  in  the  worshippers,  where  no  Liturgy  is  used,  as 
where  extempore  prayer  is  unknown.  Instances  of  folly  and 
enthusiasm  are  also  but  few  in  the  ministry  of  such  Churches  ;  and 
when  they  occur  they  have  a  better  remedy  than  entirely  to  exclude 
extempore  prayers  by  Liturgies,  and  thus  to  shut  out  the  great 
benefits  of  that  mode  of  worship,  for  the  loss  of  which  no  exclusive 
form  of  service  can  atone. 

The  whole,  we  think,  comes  to  this, — that  there  are  advantages 
in  each  mode  of  worship  ;  and  that,  when  combined  prudently,  the 
public  service  of  the  sanctuary  has  its  most  perfect  constitution. 
Much,  however,  in  the  practice  of  Churches  is  to  be  regulated  by 
due  respect  to  differences  of  opinion,  and  even  to  prejudice,  on  a 
point  upon  which  we  are  left  at  liberty  by  the  Scriptures,  and  which 
must  therefore  be  ranked  among  things  prudential.  Here,  as  in 
many  other  things,  Christians  must  give  place  to  each  other,  and 
do  all  things  "  in  charity." 

Praise  and  thanksgiving  are  implied  in  prayer,  and  included 
indeed  in  our  definition  of  that  duty,  as  given  above.     But  beside 
those  ascriptions  of  praise  and  expressions  of  gratitude,  which  are 
to  be  mingled  with  the  precatory  part  of  our  devotions,  solemn 
psalms  and  hymns  of  praise,  to  be  sung  with  the  voice,  and  accom- 
panied with  the  melody  of  the  heart,  are  of  Apostolic  injunction, 
and  form  an  important  and  exhilarating  part  of  the  worship  of  God4 
whether  public  or  social.     It  is  thus  that  God  is  publicly  acknow- 
ledged as  the  great  source  of  all  good,  and  the  end  to  which  all 
good  ought  again  to  tend  in  love  and  obedience  ;  and  the  practice 
of  stirring  up  our  hearts  to  a  thankful  remembrance  of  His  good- 
ness, is  equally  important  in  its  moral  influence  upon  our  feelings 
now,  and  as  it  tends  to  prepare  us  for  our  eternal  enjoyment  here- 
after.    "  Prayer,"  says  a  Divine  of  the  English  Church,  "  awakens 
in  us  a  sorrowful  sense  of  wants  and  imperfections,  and  confession 
induces  a  sad  remembrance  of  our  guilt  and  miscarriages ;  but 
thanksgiving  has  nothing  in  it  but  a  warm  sense  of  the  mightiest 
love,  and  the  most  endearing  goodness,  as  it  is  the  overflow  of  a 
heart  full  of  love,  the  free  sally  and  emission  of  soul,  that  is  capti- 
vated and  endeared  by  kindness.     To  laud  and  magnify  the  Lord 
is  the  end  for  which  we  were  born,  and  the  heaven  for  which  we 
were  designed,  and  when  we  are  arrived  to  such  a  vigorous  sense, 
of  Divine  love  as  the  blessed  inhabitants  of  heaven  have  attained^, 
we  shall  need  no  other  pleasure  or  enjoyment  to  make  us  for  ever 
happy,  but  only  to  sing  eternal  praises  to  God  and  the  Lamb  ;  the 
vigorous  relish  of  whose  unspeakable  goodness  to  us  will  so  inflame 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  247 

our  love,  and  animate  our  gratitude,  that  to  eternal  ages  Ave  shall 
never  be  able  to  refrain  from  breaking  out  into  new  songs  of  praise, 
mid  then  every  new  song  will  create  a  new  pleasure,  and  ever} 
new  pleasure  create  a  new  song."  (7) 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  Duties  we  owe  to  God. — The  Lord's  Day. 

As  we  have  just  been  treating  of  the  public  worship  of  Almight} 
God,  so  we  may  fitly  add  some  remarks  upon  the  consecration  oi 
one  day  in  seven  for  that  service,  that  it  may  be  longer  continued 
than  on  days  in  which  the  business  of  life  calls  for  our  exertions, 
and  our  minds  be  kept  free  from  its  distractions. 

The  obligation  of  a  Sabbatical  institution  upon  Christians,  as 
well  as  the  extent  of  it,  have  been  the  subjects  of  much  contro- 
versy. Christian  Churches  themselves  have  differed ;  and  the 
Theologians  of  the  same  Church.  Much  has  been  written  upon 
the  subject  on  each  side,  and  much  research  and  learning  employed, 
sometimes  to  darken  a  very  plain  subject. 

The  circumstance,  that  the  observance  of  a  Sabbath  is  no  where.. 
in  so  many,  words,  enjoined  upon  Christians,  by  our  Lord  and  his 
Apostles,  has  been  assumed  as  the  reason  for  so  great  a  license  oi 
criticism  and  argument  as  that  which  has  been  often  indulged  in 
t  o  unsettle  the  strictness  of  the  obligation  of  this  duty.  Its  obliga- 
tion has  been  represented  as  standing  upon  the  ground  of  inference 
only,  and  therefore  of  human  opinion ;  and  thus  the  opinion  against 
Sabbatical  institutions  has  been  held  up  as  equally  weighty  with 
the  opinion  in  their  favour ;  and  the  liberty  which  has  been  claimed. 
has  been  too  often  hastily  concluded  to  be  Christian  liberty.  This, 
however,  is  travelling  much  too  fast ;  for  if  the  case  were  as  much 
a  matter  of  inference,  as  such  persons  would  have  it,  it  does  not 
follow  that  every  inference  is  alike  good ;  or  that  the  opposing 
inferences  have  an  equal  force  of  truth,  any  more  than  of  piety. 

The  question  respects  the  will  of  God  as  to  this  particular 
point, — Whether  one  day  in  seven  is  to  be  wholly  devoted  to 
religion,  exclusive  of  worldly  business  and  worldly  pleasures. 
Now,  there  are  but  two  ways  in  which  the  will  of  God  can  be 
collected  from  his  word;  either  by  some  explicit  injunction  upon 
all,  or  by  incidental  circumstances.  Let  us  then  allow  for  a 
Enpneettf.  that  we  have  no  such  explicit  injunction;  yet  we  havf 

C7)  Dr.  Scroti;. 


248  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  •  [PART 

certainly  none  to  the  contrary :  Let  us  allow  that  we  have  only 
for  our  guidance  in  inferring  the  will  of  God  in  this  particular, 
certain  circumstances  declarative  of  his  will ;  yet  this  important 
conclusion  is  inevitable,  that  all  such  indicative  circumstances  are 
in  favour  of  a  Sabbatical  institution,  and  that  there  is  not  one  which 
exhibits  any  thing  contrary  to  it.  The  seventh  day  was  hallowed 
at  the  close  of  the  creation  ;  its  sanctity  was  afterwards  marked  by 
the  withholding  of  the  manna  on  that  day,  and  the  provision  of  a 
double  supply  on  the  sixth,  and  that  previous  to  the  giving  of  the 
law  from  Sinai :  It  was  then  made  a  part  of  that  great  epitome  of 
religious  and  moral  duty,  which  God  wrote  with  his  own  finger  on 
tables  of  stone  ;  it  was  a  part  of  the  public  political  law  of  the  only 
people  to  whom  Almighty'God  ever  made  himself  a  political  Head 
and  Ruler ;  its  observance  is  connected  throughout  the  prophetic 
age  with  the  highest  promises,  its  violations  with  the  severest 
maledictions ;  it  was  among  the  Jews  in  our  Lord's  time  a  day  ol 
solemn  religious  assembling,  and  was  so  observed  by  Him  ;  when 
changed  to  the  first  day  of  the  week,  it  was  the  day  on  which  the 
first  Christians  assembled ;  it  was  called,  by  way  of  eminence, 
"  the  Lord's  day ;"  and  we  have  inspired  authority  to  say,  that, 
both  under  the  Old  and  New  Testament  dispensations,  it  is  used  as 
an  expressive  type  of  the  heavenly  and  eternal  rest.  Now,  against 
all  these  circumstances  so  strongly  declarative  of  the  will  of  God. 
as  to  the  observance  of  a  Sabbatical  institution,  what  circumstance 
or  passage  of  Scripture  can  be  opposed,  as  bearing  upon  it  a 
contrary  indication?  Truly  not  one  ;  except  those  passages  in  St. 
Paul,  in  which  he  speaks  of  Jewish  Sabbaths,  with  their  Levitical 
sites,  and  of  a  distinction  of  days,  both  of  which  marked  a  weak  or 
a  criminal  adherence  to  the  abolished  ceremonial  dispensation ; 
but  which  touch  not  the  Sabbath  as  a  branch  of  the  moral  law,  or 
as  it  was  changed,  by  the  authority  of  the  Apostles,  to  the  first  day 
of  the  week. 

If,  then,  we  were  left  to  determine  the  point  by  inference  merely, 
jiow  powerful  is  the  inference  as  to  what  is  the  will  of  God  with 
respect  to  the  keeping  of  the  Sabbath  on  the  one'  hand,  and  how 
totally  unsupported  is  the  opposite  inference  on  the  other  ! 

It  may  also  be  observed,  that  those  who  will  so  strenuously  insist 
upon  the  absence  of  an  express  command  as  to  the  Sabbath  in  the 
writings  of  the  Evangelists  and  Apostles,  as  explicit  as  that  of  the 
Decalogue,  assume,  that  the  will  of  God  is  only  obligatory  when 
manifested  in  some  one  mode,  which  they  judge  to  be  most  fit. 
I>ut  this  is  a  monstrous  hypothesis ;  for  however  the  will  of  God 
may  be  manifested,  if  it  is  with  such  clearness  as  to  exclude  aH 


THIRD.1}  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  249 

reasonable  doubt,  it  is  equally  obligatory  as  when  it  assumes  the 
formality  of  legal  promulgation.  Thus  the  Bible  is  not  all  in  the 
form  of  express  and  authoritative  command  ;  it  teaches  by  exam- 
ples, by  proverbs,  by  songs,  by  incidental  allusions  and  occurrences; 
and  yet  is,  throughout,  a  manifestation  of  the  will  of  God  as  to 
morals  and  religion  in  their  various  branches,  and  if  disregarded. 
it  will  be  so  at  every  man's  peril. 

But  strong  as  this  ground  is,  we  quit  it  for  a  still  stronger.  It  is 
wholly  a  mistake,  that  the  Sabbath,  because  not  re-enacted  with 
the  formality  of  the  Decalogue,  is  not  explicitly  enjoined  upon 
Christians,  and  that  the  testimony  of  Scripture  to  such  an  injunction 
\s  not  unequivocal  and  irrefragable.  We  shall  soon  prove  that  the 
Sabbath  was  appointed  at  the  creation  of  the  world,  and  conse- 
quently for  all  men,  and  therefore  for  Christians ;  since  there  was 
never  any  repeal  of  the  original  institution.  To  this  we  add,  that 
if  the  moral  law  be  the  law  of  Christians,  then  is  the  Sabbath  as 
explicitly  enjoined  upon  them  as  upon  the  Jews.  But  that  the 
moral  law  is  our  law,  as  well  as  the  law  of  the  Jews,  all  but  Anti- 
nomians  must  acknowledge  ;  and  few,  we  suppose,  will  be  inclined 
to  run  into  the  fearful  mazes  of  that  error,  in  order  to  support  lax 
notions  as  to  the  obligation  of  the  Sabbath,  into  which,  however, 
they  must  be  plunged,  if  they  deny  the  law  of  the  Decalogue  to  be 
binding  upon  us.  That  it  is  so  bound  upon  us,  a  few  passages  of 
Scripture  will  prove  as  well  as  many. 

Our  Lord  declares,  that  he  came  not  to  destroy  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets,  but  to  fulfil.  Take  it,  that  by  the  "  Law,"  he  meant  both 
the  moral  and  the  ceremonial ;  ceremonial  law  could  only  be  ful- 
filled in  hiin,  by  realizing  its  types  ;  and  moral  law,  by  upholding  its 
authority.  For  "  the  Prophets,"  they  admit  of  a  similar  distinction ; 
they  either  enjoin  morality,  or  utter  prophecies  of  Christ ;  the  latter 
of  which  were  fulfilled  in  the  sense  of  accomplishment,  the  former 
by  being  sanctioned  and  enforced.  That  the  observance  of  the 
Sabbath  is  a  part  of  the  moral  law,  is  clear  from  its  being  found 
in  the  Decalogue,  the  doctrine  of  which  our  Lord  sums  up  in  the 
moral  duties  of  loving  God  and  our  neighbour ;  and  for  this  reason 
the  injunctions  of  the  Prophets,  on  the  subject  of  the  Sabbath,  are 
to  be  regarded  as  a  part  of  their  moral  teaching.  (8)  Some  Divines 
have,  it  is  true,  called  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  a  positive,, 
and  not  a  moral  precept.  If  it  were  so,  its  obligation  is  precisely 
t  he  same,  in  all  cases  where  God  himself  has  not  relaxed  it ;  and 
if  a  positive  precept  only,  it  has  surely  a  special  eminence  given  to. 
it,  by  being  placed  in  the  list  of  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  being 

(8)  Sec  this  stated  marc  at  lav?*,  Part  iii,  dhap.  i. 


DdO  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

capable,  with  them,  of  an  epitome  which  resolves  them  into  the 
love  of  God  and  our  neighbour.  (9)  The  truth  seems  to  be,  that  it 
is  a  mixed  precept,  and  not  wholly  positive  ;  but  intimately,  perhaps 
essentially,  connected  with  several  moral  principles,  of  homage  to 
God,  and  mercy  to  men  ;  with  the  obligation  of  religious  worship,  of 
public  religious  worship,  and  of  undistracied  public  worship :  and 
this  will  account  for  its  collocation  in  the  Decalogue  with  the 
highest  duties  of  religion,  and  the  leading  rules  of  personal  and 
social  morality. 

The  passage  from  our  Lord's  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  with  Its 
corniest,  is  a  sufficiently  explicit  enforcement  of  the  moral  law, 
generally,  upon  his  followers  ;  but  when  he  says,  "  The  Sabbath 
was  made  for  man,"  he  clearly  refers  to  its  original  institution,  a? 
a  universal  law,  and  not  to  its  obligation  upon  the  Jews  only,  in 
consequence  of  the  enactments  of  the  law  of  Moses.  It  "  was 
made  for  man,"  not  as  he  may  be  a  Jew,  or  a  Christian  ;  but  as 
man,  a  creature  bound  to  love,  worship,  and  obey  his  God  and 
Maker,  and  on  his  trial  for  eternity. 

Another  explicit  proof  that  the  law  of  the  Ten  Commandments, 
and,  consequently,  the  law  of  the  Sabbath,  is  obligatory  upon 
Christians,  is  found  in  the  answer  of  the  Apostle  to  an  objection 
to  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  Rom.  iii,  31,  "Do  we  then 
make  void  the  law  through  faith  1"  which  is  equivalent  to  asking, 
Does  Christianity  teach,  that  the  law  is  no  longer  obligatory  on 
Christians,  because  it  teaches  that  no  man  can  be  justified  by  it? 
To  this  he  answers,  in  the  most  solemn  form  of  expression,  "  God 
forbid  ;  yea,  we  establish  the  law."  Now,  the  sense  in  which  the 
Apostle  uses  the  term,  "  the  law,"  in  this  argument,  is  indubitably 
marked  in  chap,  vii,  7,  "  I  had  not  known  sin  but  by  the  law ;  for 
\  had  not  known  lust,  except  the  laic  had  said,  Thou  shalt  not 
covet :"  Which  being  a  plain  reference  to  the  tenth  command  of 
the  Decalogue,  as  plainly  shows  that  the  Decalogue  is  "  the  laio" 
of  which  he  speaks.  This,  then,  is  the  law  which  is  "  established" 
by  the  Gospel ;  and  this  can  mean  nothing  else  than  the  establish- 
ment and  confirmation  of  its  authority,  as  the  rule  of  all  inward 
and  outward  holiness.  Whoever,  therefore,  denies  the  obligation 
of  the  Sabbath  on  Christians,  denies  the  obligation  of  the  whole 
Decalogue ;  and  there  is  no  real  medium  between  the  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  Divine  authority  of  this  sacred  institution,  as  a 
universal  law,  and  that  gross  corruption  of  Christianity,  generally 
iesignated  Antinomianism. 

(9)  See  Vol.  ii,  p.  196, 


VillRD  J  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  Zo\ 

Nor  is  there  any  force  in  the  dilemma  into  which  the  Anti 
Sabbatarians  would  push  us,  Avhen  they  argue,  that,  if  the  case  be 
so,  then  are  we  bound  to  the  same  circumstantial  exactitude  ol 
obedience  as  to  this  command,  as  to  the  other  precepts  of  the 
Decalogue ;  and,  therefore,  that  we  are  bound  to  observe  the 
seventh  day,  reckoning  from  Saturday,  as  the  Sabbath-day.  But, 
as  the  command  is  partly  positive,  and  partly  moral,  it  may  have 
circumstances  which  are  capable  of  being  altered  in  perfect  accord- 
ance  with  the  moral  principles  on  which  it  rests,  and  the  moral  ends 
which  it  proposes.  Such  circumstances  are  not  indeed  to  be  judged 
of  on  our  own  authority.  We  must  either  have  such  general  prin- 
ciples for  our  guidance  as  have  been  revealed  by  God,  and  cannot 
therefore  be  questioned,  or  some  special  authority  from  which  there 
can  be  no  just  appeal.  Now,  though  there  is  not  on  record  any 
Divine  command  issued -to  the  Apostles,  to  change  the  Sabbath 
from  the  day  on  which  it  was  held  by  the  Jews,  to  the  first  day  o! 
the  week ;  yet,  when  we  see  that  this  was  done  in  the  Apostolic 
age,  and  that  St.  Paul  speaks  of  the  Jewish  Sabbaths  as  not  being 
obligatory  upon  Christians,  whilst  he  yet  contends  that  the  whole 
moral  law  is  obligatory  upon  them  ;  the  fair  inference  is,  that  this 
change  of  the  day  was  made  by  Divine  direction.  It  is  at  least 
more  than  inference,  that  the  change  was  made  under  the  sanction 
of  inspired  men;  and  those  men,  the  appointed  rulers  in  the  Church 
of  Christ ;  whose  business  it  was  to  "  set  all  things  in  order,"  which 
pertained  to  its  worship  and  moral  government.  We  may  rest  well 
enough,  therefore,  satisfied  with  this, — that  as  a  Sabbath  is  obliga- 
tory upon  us,  we  act  under  Apostolic  authority  for  observing  it  on 
the  first  day  of  the  week,  and  thus  commemorate  at  once  the  creation 
and  the  redemption  of  the  world. 

Thus,  even  if  it  were  conceded,  that  the  change  of  the  day  wa* 
made  by  the  agreement  of  the  Apostles,  without  express  directions 
from  Christ,  (which  is  not  probable,)  it  is  certain  that  it  was  not 
done  without  express  authority  confided  to  them  by  Christ ;  but  ii 
would  not  even  follow  from  this  change,  that  they  did  in  reality 
make  any  alteration  in -the  law  of  the  Sabbath,  either  as  it  stood  at 
the  time  of  its  original  institution  at  the  close  of  the  creation,  or  in 
the  Decalogue  of  Moses.  The  same  portion  of  time  which  consti- 
tuted the  seventh  day  from  the  creation,  could  not  be  observed  in 
all  parts  of  the  earth ;  and  it  is  not  probable,  therefore,  that  the 
original  law  expresses  more,  than  that  a  seventh  day,  or  one  day 
in  seven,  the  seventh  day  after  six  days  of  labour,  should  be  thus 
appropriated,  from  whatever  point  the  enumeration  might  set  out. 
or  the  hebdomadal  cycle  beuin.    For  if  more  had  been  intended. 


2o2  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PAKT 

then  it  would  have  been  necessary  to  establish  a  rule  for  the  reck- 
oning of  days  themselves,  which  has  been  different  in  different 
nations ;  some  reckoning  from  evening  to  evening,  as  the  Jews 
now  do ;  others  from  midnight  to  midnight,  &c.  So  that  those 
persons  in  this  country  and  in  America,  who  hold  their  Sabbath 
on  Saturday,  under  the  notion  of  exactly  conforming  to  the  Olrl 
Testament,  and  yet  calculate  the  days  from  midnight  to  midnight, 
have  no  assurance  at  all  that  they  do  not  desecrate  a  part  of  the 
original  Sabbath,  which  might  begin,  as  the  Jewish  Sabbath  now, 
on  Friday  evening ;  and,  on  the  contrary,  hallow  a  portion  of  a 
common  day,  by  extending  the  Sabbath  beyond  Saturday  evening. 
Even  if  this  were  ascertained,  the  differences  of  latitude  and  longi- 
tude would  throw  the  whole  into  disorder ;  and  it  is  not  probable 
that  a  universal  law  should  have  been  fettered  with  that  circum- 
stantial exactness,  which  would  have  rendered  difficult,  and  some- 
times doubtful,  astronomical  calculations  necessary  in  order  to  it? 
being  obeyed  according  to  the  intention  of  the  Lawgiver.  Accord 
ingly  we  find,  says  Mr.  Holden,  that 

"  In  the  original  institution  it  is  stated  in  general  terms,  that  God 
blessed  and  sanctified  the  seventh  day,  which  must  undoubtedly 
imply  the  sanctity  of  every  seventh  day ;  but  not  that  it  is  to  be 
subsequently  reckoned  from  the  first  demiurgic  day.  Had  this 
been  included  in  the  command  of  the  Almighty,  something,  it  is 
probable,  would  have  been  added  declaratory  of  the  intention ; 
whereas  expressions  the  most  undefined  are  employed ;  not  a  syl- 
lable is  uttered  concerning  the  order  and  number  of  the  days  ;  am! 
it  cannot  reasonably  be  disputed  that  the  command  is  truly  obeyed 
by  the  separation  of  every  seventh  day,  from  common  to  sacred 
purposes,  at  whatever  given  time  the  cycle  may  commence.  The 
difference  in  the  mode  of  expression  here  from  that  which  the 
sacred  historian  has  used  in  the  first  chapter,  is  very  remarkable. 
At  the  conclusion  of  each  division  of  the  work  of  creation,  he  says, 
'  The  evening  and  the  morning  were  the  first  day,'  and  so  on  ;  but 
at  the  termination  of  the  whole,  he  merely  calls  it  the  seventh  day  ; 
a  diversity  of  phrase,  which,  as  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  ever} 
idea  of  inspiration  to  suppose  it  undesigned,  must  have  been  intend- 
ed to  denote  a  day,  leaving  it  to  each  people  as  to  what  manner  it 
is  to  be  reckoned.  The  term  obviously  imports  the  period  of  the 
earth's  rotation  round  its  axis,  while  it  is  left  undetermined,  whether 
it  shall  be  counted  from  evening  or  morning,  from  noon  or  mid- 
night. The  terms  of  the  law  are,  '  Remember  the  Sabbath-day,  to 
keep  it  holy.  Six  days  shalt  thou  labour,  and  do  all  thy  work  ;  but 
the  seventh  day  is  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy  God. — For  in  six 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  %od 

days  the  Lord  made  heaven  and  earth,  the  sea,  and  all  that  in  them 
is,  and  rested  the  seventh  day ;  wherefore  the  Lord  blessed  the 
Sabbath-day,  and  hallowed  it.'  With  respect  to  time,  it  is  here 
mentioned  in  the  same  indefinite  manner  as  at  its  primeval  institu- 
tion, nothing  more  being  expressly  required  than  to  observe  a  day 
of  sacred  rest  after  every  six  days  of  labour.  The  seventh  day  is 
to  be  kept  holy ;  but  not  a  word  is  said  as  to  what  epoch  the 
commencement  of  the  series  is  to  be  referred;  nor  could  the 
Hebrews  have  determined  from  the  Decalogue  what  day  of  the 
week  was  to  be  kept  as  their  Sabbath.  The  precept  is  not,  Re- 
member the  seventh  day  of  the  week,  to  keep  it  holy,  but '  Remember 
the  Sabbath-day,  to  keep  it  holy  ;'  and  in  the  following  explication 
of  these  expressions,  it  is  not  said  that  the  seventh  day  of  the  week 
is  the  Sabbath,  but  without  restriction,  'The  seventh  day  is  the 
Sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy  God ;'  not  the  seventh  according  to  any 
particular  method  of  computing  the  septenary  cycle  ;  but,  in  refer- 
ence to  the  six  before  mentioned,  every  seventh  day  in  rotation 
after  six  of  labour."(l) 

Thus  that  part  of  the  Jewish  law,  the  Decalogue,  which,  on  the 
authority  of  the  New  Testament,  we  have  shown  to  be  obligatory 
upon  Christians,  leaves  the  computation  of  the  hebdomadal  cycle 
undetermined ;  and,  after  six  days  of  labour,  enjoins  the  seventh 
as  the  Sabbath,  to  which  the  Christian  practice  as  exactly  conforms 
as  the  Jewish.  It  is  not,  however,  left  to  every  individual  to  deter- 
mine which  day  should  be  his  Sabbath,  though  he  should  fulfil  the 
law  so  far  as  to  abstract  the  seventh  part  of  his  time  from  labour. 
It  was  ordained  for  worship,  for  public  worship  ;  and  it  is  therefore 
necessary  that  the  Sabbath  should  be  uniformly  observed  by  a 
whole  community  at  the  same  time.  The  Divine  Legislator  of  the 
Jews  interposed  for  this  end,  by  special  direction,  as  to  his  people. 
The  first  Sabbath  kept  in  the  wilderness  was  calculated  from  the. 
lirst  day  in  which  the  manna  fell ;  and  with  no  apparent  reference 
to  the  creation  of  the  world.  By  Apostolic  authority,  it  is  now 
(ixed  to  be  held  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  ;  and  thus  one  of  the 
great  ends  for  which  it  was  established,  that  it  should  be  a  day  oi 
"  holy  convocation,"  is  secured. 

The  above  observations  proceed  upon  the  ground,  that  the 
Sabbath,  according  to  the  fair  interpretation  of  the  words  of  Moses, 
was  instituted  upon  the  creation  of  the  world.  But  we  have  had 
Divines  of  considerable  eminence  in  the  English  Church,  who 
have  attempted  to  disprove  this.  The  reason  of  the  zeal  displayed 
by  some  of  them  on  this  question  may  be  easily  explained. 

( I )  Holpen  On  the  Sabbath. 

Vol.  III.  30 


254  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

All  the  Churches  of  the  Reformation  did  not  indeed  agree  in 
their  views  of  the  Sabbath ;  but  the  Reformers  of  England  and 
Scotland  generally  adopted  the  strict  and  scriptural  view ;  and 
after  them  the  Puritans.  The  opponents  of  the  Puritans,  in  their 
controversies  with  them,  and  especially  after  the  Restoration, 
associated  a  strict  observance  of  the  Sabbath  with  hypocrisy  and 
disaffection ;  and  no  small  degree  of  ingenuity  and  learning  was 
employed  to  prove,  that,  in  the  intervals  of  public  worship,  pleasure 
or  business  might  be  lawfully  pursued ;  and  that  this  Christian 
festival  stands  on  entirely  different  grounds  from  that  of  the  Jewish 
Sabbath.  The  appointment  of  a  Sabbath  for  man,  at  the  close  of 
the  creation,  was  unfriendly  to  this  notion  ;  and  an  effort  therefore 
was  made  to  explain  away  the  testimony  of  Moses  in  the  book  oi 
Genesis,  by  alleging  that  the  Sabbath  is  there  mentioned  by  prolepsis 
or  anticipation.  Of  the  arguments  of  this  class  of  Divines,  Paley 
availed  himself  in  his  "  Moral  Philosophy,"  and  has  become  the 
most  popular  authority  on  this  side  of  the  question. 

Paley's  argument  is  well  summed  up,  and  satisfactorily  answered* 
in  the  able  work  which  has  been  above  quoted. 

"Among  those  who  have  held  that  the  Pentateuchal  record, 
above  cited,  is  proleptical,  and  that  the  Sabbath  is  to  be  considered 
a  part  of  the  peculiar  laws  of  the  Jewish  polity,  no  one  has  dis- 
played more  ability  than  Dr.  Paley.  Others  on  the  same  side 
have  exhibited  far  more  extensive  learning,  and  have  exercised 
much  more  patient  research ;  but  for  acuteness  of  intellect,  for 
coolness  of  judgment,  and  a  habit  of  perspicacious  reasoning,  he 
has  been  rarely,  if  ever,  excelled.  The  arguments  which  he  has 
approved,  must  be  allowed  to  be  the  chief  strength  of  the  cause  ; 
and,  as  he  is  at  once  the  most  judicious  and  most  popular  of  its 
advocates,  all  that  he  has  advanced  demands  a  careful  and  candid 
examination.  The  doctrine  which  he  maintains  is,  that  the  Sab- 
bath was  not  instituted  at  the  creation ;  that  it  was  designed  for 
the  Jews  only ;  that  the  assembling  upon  the  first  day  of  the  week 
for  the  purpose  of  public  worship,  is  a  law  of  Christianity,  of  Divine 
appointment ;  but  that  the  resting  on  it  longer  than  is  necessary 
for  attendance  on  these  assemblies,  is  an  ordinance  of  human 
institution ;  binding,  nevertheless,  upon  the  conscience  of  every 
individual  of  a  country  in  which  a  weekly  Sabbath  is  established, 
for  the  sake  of  the  beneficial  purposes  which  the  public  and  regular 
observance  of  it  promotes,  and  recommended  perhaps,  in  some 
degree,  to  the  Divine  approbation,  by  the  resemblance  it  bears  to 
what  God  was  pleased  to  make  a  solemn  part  of  the  law  which  he 
delivered  to  the  people  of  Israel,  and  by  its  subserviency  to  many 


VKIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  255 

of  the  same  uses.  Such  is  the  doctrine  of  this  very  able  writer  in 
his  Moral  and  Political  Philosophy ;  a  doctrine  which  places  the 
►Sabbath  on  the  footing  of  civil  laws,  recommended  by  their  expe- 
diency, and  which,  being  sanctioned  by  so  high  an  authority,  has 
probably  given  great  encouragement  to  the  lax  notions  concerning 
fhe  Sabbath  which  unhappily  prevail. 

"  Dr.  Paley's  principal  argument  is,  that  the  first  institution  ot 
the  Sabbath  took  place  during  the  sojourning  of  the  Jews  in  the 
wilderness.  Upon  the  complaint  of  the  people  for  want  of  food, 
Ood  was  pleased  to  provide  for  their  relief  by  a  miraculous  supply 
of  manna,  which  was  found  every  morning  upon  the  ground  about 
the  camp :  '  And  they  gathered  it  every  morning,  every  mail 
according  to  his  eating ;  and  when  the  sun  waxed  hot,  it  melted, 
And  it  came  to  pass,  that  on  the  sixth  day  they  gathered  twice  as 
much  bread,  two  omers  for  one  man ;  and  all  the  rulers  of  the 
congregation  came  and  told  Moses.  And  he  said  unto  them,  This 
is  that  which  the  Lord  hath  said,  To-morrow  is  the  rest  of  the  holy 
Sabbath  unto  the  Lord :  Bake  that  which  ye  will  bake  to-day,  and 
seethe  that  ye  will  seethe  ;  and  that  which  remaineth  over  lay  up 
tor  you,  to  be  kept  until  the  morning.  And  they  laid  it  up  till 
the  morning,  as  Moses  bade  ;  and  it  did  not  stink,  (as  it  had  done 
before,  when  some  of  them  left  it  till  the  morning,)  neither  was 
^here  any  worm  therein.  And  Moses  said,  Eat  that  to-day ;  for 
to-day  is  a  Sabbath  unto  the  Lord ;  to-day  ye  shall  not  find  it  in  the 
iicld.  Six  days  ye  shall  gather  it ;  but  on  the  seventh  day,  which 
is  the  Sabbath,  in  it  there  shall  be  none.  And  it  came  to  pass, 
•that  there  went  out  some  of  the  people  on  the  seventh  day  for  to 
gather,  and  they  found  none.  And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
How  long  refuse  ye  to  keep  my  commandments,  and  my  laws? 
See,  for  tfiat  the  Lord  hath  given  you  the  Sabbath,  therefore  he 
giveth  you  on  the  sixth  day  the  bread  of  two  days ;  abide  ye  every 
man  in  his  place ;  let  no  man  go  out  of  his  place  on  the  seventh 
day.     So  the  people  rested  on  the  seventh  day.' 

"  From  this  passage,  Dr.  Paley  infers  that  the  Sabbath  was  first 
instituted  in  the  wilderness ;  but  to  preclude  the  possibility  of  mis- 
representing his  argument,  I  will  quote  his  own  words  :  '  Now,  in 
my  opinion,  the  transaction  in  the  wilderness  above  recited,  was 
the  first  actual  institution  of  the  Sabbath.  For  if  the  Sabbath  had 
been  instituted  at  the  time  of  the  creation,  as  the  words  in  Genesis 
may  seem  at  first  sight  to  import ;  and  if  it  had  been  observed  all 
along  from  that  time  to  the  departure  of  the  Jews  out  of  Egypt,  a 
oeriod  of  about  two  thousand  five  hundred  years  ;  it  appears  unac- 
countable that  no  mention  of  it,  no  occasion  of  even  the  obscurest 


i56  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

allusion  to  it,  should  occur,  either  in  the  general  history  of  the 
world  before  the  call  of  Abraham,  which  contains,  we  admit,  only 
a  few  memoirs  of  its  early  ages,  and  those  extremely  abridged  ;  or, 
which  is  more  to  be  wondered  at,  in  that  of  the  lives  of  the  first 
three  Jewish  patriarchs,  which,  in  many  parts  of  the  account,  is 
sufficiently  circumstantial  and  domestic.  Nor  is  there,  in  the 
passage  above  quoted  from  the  sixteenth  chapter  of  Exodus,  any 
intimation  that  the  Sabbath,  when  appointed  to  be  observed,  wa* 
only  the  revival  of  an  ancient  institution,  which  had  been  neglected, 
forgotten,  or  suspended ;  nor  is  any  such  neglect  imputed  either 
to  the  inhabitants  of  the  old  world,  or  to  any  part  of  the  family  of 
Noah ;  nor,  lastly,  is  any  permission  recorded  to  dispense  with  the 
institution  during  the  captivity  of  the  Jews  in  Egypt,  or  on  any 
other  public  emergency.' 

"  As  to  the  first  part  of  this  reasoning,  if  it  were  granted  that  in 
the  history  of  the  patriarchal  ages  no  mention  is  made  of  the  Sab- 
bath, nor  even  the  obscurest  allusion  to  it,  it  would  be  unfair  to 
conclude  that  it  was  not  appointed  previous  to  the  departure  of 
the  children  of  Israel  from  Egypt.  If  instituted  at  the  creation, 
the  memory  of  it  might  have  been  forgotten  in  the  lapse  of  time, 
and  the  growing  corruption  of  the  world  ;  or,  what  is  more  proba- 
ble, it  might  have  been  observed  by  the  patriarchs,  though  no 
mention  is  made  of  it  in  the  narrative  of  their  lives,  which,  however 
circumstantial  in  some  particulars,  is,  upon  the  whole,  very  brief 
and  compendious.  There  are  omissions  in  the  sacred  history 
much  more  extraordinary.  Excepting  Jacob's  supplication  at 
Bethel,  scarcely  a  single  allusion  to  prayer  is  to  be  found  in  all  the 
Pentateuch ;  yet,  considering  the  eminent  piety  of  the  worthies 
recorded  in  it,  we  cannot  doubt  the  frequency  of  their  devotional 
exercises.  Circumcision  being  the  sign  of  God's  covenant  with 
Abraham,  was  beyond  all  question  punctually  observed  by  the 
Israelites,  yet,  from  their  settlement  in  Canaan,  no  particular 
instance  is  recorded  of  it  till  the  circumcision  of  Christ,  compre- 
hending a  period  of  about  one  thousand  five  hundred  years.  No 
express  mention  of  the  Sabbath  occurs  in  the  books  of  Joshua. 
Judges,  Ruth,  the  first  and  second  of  Samuel,  or  the  first  of  Kings. 
though  it  was,  doubtless,  regularly  observed  all  the  time  included 
in  these  histories.  In  the  second  book  of  Kings,  and  the  first  and 
second  of  Chronicles,  it  is  mentioned  only  twelve  times,  and  some 
of  them  are  merely  repetitions  of  the  same  instance.  If  the  Sab- 
bath is  so  seldom  spoken  of  in  this  long  historical  series,  it  can  be 
nothing  wonderful  if  it  should  not  be  mentioned  in  the  summar) 
account  of  the  patriarchal  ages. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  25? 

"But  though  the  Sabbath  is  not  expressly  mentioned  in  the 
history  of  the  antediluvian  and  patriarchal  ages,  the  observance 
of  it  seems  to  be  intimated  by  the  division  of  time  into  weeks.  In 
relating  the  catastrophe  of  the  flood,  the  historian  informs  us,  that 
Noah,  at  the  end  of  forty  days,  opened  the  window  of  the  ark ; 
•  and  he  stayed  yet  other  seven  days,  and  again  he  sent  forth  the 
dove  out  of  the  ark ;  and  the  dove  came  in  to  him  in  the  evening, 
and,  lo,  in  her  mouth  was  an  olive  leaf,  pluckt  off.  So  Noah 
knew  that  the  waters  were  abated  from  off  the  earth.  And  he 
stayed  yet  other  seven  days,  and  sent  forth  the  dove,  which  returned 
not  again  unto  him  any  more.'  The  term  '  week'  is  used  by  Laban 
in  reference  to  the  nuptials  of  Leah,  when  he  says,  '  Fulfil  her 
week,  and  we  will  give  thee  this  also,  for  the  service  which  thou 
shalt  serve  with  me  yet  seven  other  years.'  A  week  of  days  is 
here  plainly  signified,  the  same  portion  of  time  which,  in  succeed- 
ing ages,  was  set  apart  for  nuptial  festivities,  as  appears  from  the 
book  of  Esther,  where  the  marriage  feast  of  Vashti  lasted  seven 
days,  and  more  particularly  from  the  account  of  Samson's  mar- 
riage feast.  Joseph  and  his  brethren  mourned  for  their  father 
Jacob  seven  days. 

"  That  the  computation  of  time  by  weeks  obtained  from  the 
most  remote  antiquity,  appears  from  the  traditionary  and  written 
records  of  all  nations,  the  numerous  and  undeniable  testimonies  of 
which  have  been  so  often  collected  and  displayed,  that  it  would 
be  worse  than  useless  to  repeat  them. 

"  Combining  all  these  testimonies  together,  they  fully  establish 
the  primitive  custom  of  measuring  time  by  the  division  of  weeks  ; 
and  prevailing  as  it  did  among  nations  separated  by  distance* 
having  no  mutual  intercourse,  and  wholly  distinct  in  manners,  it 
must  have  originated  from  one  common  source,  which  cannot 
reasonably  be  supposed  any  other  than  the  memory  of  the  creation 
preserved  in  the  Noahic  family,  and  handed  down  to  their  posteri- 
ties. The  computation  by  days,  months,  and  years,  arises  from 
obvious  causes,  the  revolution  of  the  moon,  and  the  annual  and 
diurnal  revolutions  of  the  sun  ;  but  the  division  of  time  by  periods 
of  seven  days,  has  no  foundation  in  any  natural  or  visible  septenary 
change  ;  it  must,  therefore,  have  originated  from  some  positive 
appointment,  or  some  tradition  anterior  to  the  dispersion  of  man- 
kind, which  cannot  well  be  any  other  than  the  memory  of  the 
creation  and  primeval  blessing  of  the  seventh  day. 

"  Dr.  Paley's  next  argument  is,  that  '  there  is  not  in  the  six- 
teenth chapter  of  Exodus  any  intimation  that  the  Sabbath,  when 
.ippointcd  to  he  observed,  was  only  the  revival  of  an  ancient 

30* 


258  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

institution  which  had  been  neglected,  forgotten,  or  suspended.' 
The  contrary,  however,  seems  the  more  natural  inference  from 
the  narrative.     It  is  mentioned  exactly  in  the  way  an  historian 
would,  who  had  occasion  to  speak  of  a  well-known  institution. 
For  instance,  when  the  people  were  astonished  at  the  double 
supply  of  manna  on  the  sixth  day,  Moses  observes,  '  This  is  that 
which  the  Lord  hath  said,  To-morrow  is  the  rest  of  the  holy  Sab- 
bath unto  the  Lord ;'  which,  as  far  as  we  know,  was  never  said 
previously  to  this  transaction,  but  at  the  close  of  the  creation. 
This,  surely,  is  the  language  of  a  man  referring  to  a  matter  with 
which  the  people  were  already  acquainted,  and  recalling  it  to  their 
remembrance.     In  the  fifth  verse,  God  promises  on  the  sixth  day 
twice  as  much  as  they  gather  daily.     For  this  no  reason  is  given, 
which  seems  to  imply  that  it  was  already  known  to  the  children 
of  Israel.     Such  a  promise,  without  some  cause  being  assigned  for 
so  extraordinary  a  circumstance,  would  have  been  strange  indeed  : 
and  if  the  reason  had  been,  that  the  seventh  day  was  now  for  the 
first  time  to  be  appointed  a  festival,  in  which  no  work  was  to  be 
done,  would  not  the  author  have  stated  this  circumstance  1  Again, 
it  is  said,  '  Six  days  ye  shall  gather  it ;  but  on  the  seventh  day, 
which  is  the  Sabbath,  in  it  there  shall  be  none  ;'  and  '  for  that  the 
Lord  hath  given  you  the  Sabbath,  therefore  he  giveth  you  on  the 
sixth  clay  the  bread  of  two  days.'     Here  the  Sabbath  is  spoken  of 
as  an  ordinance  with  which  the  people  were  familiar.     A  double- 
quantity  of  manna  was  given  on  the  sixth  day,  because  the  follow- 
ing day,  as  they  well  knew,  was  the  Sabbath,  in  which  God  rested 
from  his  work,  and  which  was  to  be  kept  as  a  day  of  rest,  and 
holy  to  the  Lord.     It  is  likewise  mentioned  incidentally,  as  it  were, 
in  the  recital  of  the  miraculous  supply  of  manna,  without  any 
notice  of  its  being  enjoined  upon  that  occasion  for  the  first  time  ; 
which  would  be  a  very  surprising  circumstance,  had  it  been  thf 
original  establishment  of  the  Sabbath.     In  short,  the  entire  phrase- 
ology in  the  account  of  this  remarkable  transaction  accords  with 
the  supposition,  and  with  it  alone,  that  the  Sabbath  had  been  long 
established,  and  was  well  known  to  the  Israelites. 

"That  no  neglect  of  the  Sabbath  is  'imputed  either  to  the 
inhabitants  of  the  old  world,  or  to  any  of  the  family  of  Noah,'  is 
very  true ;  but,  so  far  from  there  being  any  proof  of  such  negli- 
gence, there  is,  on  the  contrary,  as  we  have  seen,  much  reason  for 
believing  that  it  was  duly  observed  by  the  pious  Sethites  of  the  old 
world,  and  after  the  deluge,  by  the  virtuous  line  of  Shem.  True, 
likewise,  it  is,  that  there  is  not  '  any  permission  recorded  to  dis- 
pense with  the  institution  during  the  captivity  of  the  Jews  in  Egypt, 


THIRD. j  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  259 

or  on  any  other  public  emergency.'  But  where  is  tbc  evidence 
that  such  a  permission  would  be  consistent  with  the  Divine  wisdom? 
And  if  not,  none  such  would  either  be  given  or  recorded.  At  any 
rate,  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  the  silence  of  Scripture,  concerning 
such  a  circumstance,  can  furnish  an  argument  in  vindication  of  the 
opinion,  that  the  Sabbath  was  first  appointed  in  the  wilderness. 
To  allege  it  far  this  purpose,  is  just  as  inconclusive  as  it  would  be 
to  argue  that  the  Sabbath  was  instituted  subsequent  to  the  return 
of  the  Jews  from  Babylonia,  because  neither  the  observance  of  it, 
nor  any  permission  to  dispense  with  it,  during  the  captivity,  is 
recorded  in  Scripture. 

"  The  passage  in  the  second  chapter  of  Genesis  is  next  adduced 
by  Dr.  Paley,  and  he  pronounces  it  not  inconsistent  with  his 
opinion ;  '  for  as  the  seventh  day  was  erected  into  a  Sabbath  on 
account  of  God's  resting  upon  that  day  from  the  work  of  creation, 
it  was  natural  enough  in  the  historian,  when  he  had  related  the 
history  of  the  creation,  and  of  God's  ceasing  from  it  on  the  seventh 
day,  to  add,  '  and  God  blessed  the  seventh  day,  and  sanctified  it, 
because  that  on  it  he  had  rested  from  all  his  work  which  God  had 
created  and  made ;'  although  the  blessing  and  sanctification,  that 
is,  the  religious  distinction  and  appropriation  of  that  day,  were  not 
actually  made  till  many  ages  afterwards.  The  words  do  not  assert, 
that  God  then  '  blessed'  and  '  sanctified'  the  seventh  day,  but  that 
he  blessed  and  sanctified  it  for  that  reason ;  and  if  any  ask,  why 
the  Sabbath,  or  sanctification  of  the  seventh  day,  was  then  men- 
tioned, if  it  were  not  then  appointed,  the  answer  is  at  hand,  the 
order  of  connexion,  and  not  of  time,  introduced  the  mention  of  the 
Sabbath  in  the  history  of  the  subject  which  it  was  ordained  to 
commemorate.' 

"  That  the  Hebrew  historian,  in  the  passage  here  referred  to, 
uses  a  prolepsis  or  anticipation,  and  alludes  to  the  Mosaical  insti- 
tution of  the  Sabbath,  is  maintained  by  some  of  the  ancient  Fathers, 
by  Waehner,  Heidegger,  Beausobre,  by  Le  Clerc,  Rosenmuller, 
Geddes,  Dawson,  and  other  commentators,  and  by  the  general 
stream  of  those  writers  who  regard  the  Sabbath  as  peculiar  to  the 
Jews.  Yet  this  opinion  is  built  upon  the  assumption,  that  the  book 
of  Genesis  was  not  written  till  after  the  giving  of  the  law,  which 
may  be  the  fact,  but  of  which  most  unquestionably  there  is  no 
proof.  But  waiving  this  consideration,  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  con- 
ceive a  greater  violence  to  the  sacred  text,  than  is  otfered  by  this 
interpretation.  It  attributes  to  the  inspired  author  the  absurd 
assertion,  that  God  rested  on  the  seventh  day  from  all  his  works 
which  he  had  made,  and  therefore  about  two  thousand  five  him- 


360  THEOLOGICAL.  INSTITUTES.  [PABI 

dred  years  after,  God  blessed  and  sanctified  the  seventh  day.  It 
?nay  be  as  well  imagined  that  God  had  finished  his  work  on  the 
seventh  day,  but  rested  on  some  other  seventh  day,  as  that  he 
rested  the  day  following  the  work  of  creation,  and  afterward? 
blessed  and  sanctified  another.  Not  the  slightest  evidence  appears 
tor  believing  that  Moses  followed  '  the  order  of  connexion,  and  not 
of  time,'  for  no  reasonable  motive  can  be  assigned  for  then  intro- 
ducing the  mention  of  it,  if  it  was  not  then  appointed.  The  design 
of  the  sacred  historian  clearly  is,  to  give  a  faithful  account  of  the 
origin  of  the  world,  and  both  the  resting  on  the  seventh  day,  and  the 
blessing  it,  have  too  close  a  connexion  to  be  separated  :  If  the  one 
took  place  immediately  after  the  work  of  creation  was  concluded, 
so  did  the  other.  To  the  account  of  the  production  of  the  universe, 
the  whole  narrative  is  confined ;  there  is  no  intimation  of  subsequent 
events,  nor  the  most  distant  allusion  to  Jewish  ceremonies ;  and  it 
would  be  most  astonishing  if  the  writer  deserted  his  grand  object 
to  mention  one  of  the  Hebrew  ordinances  which  was  not  appointed 
Jill  ages  afterwards. 

"  But  according  to  Dr.  Geddes,  the  opinion  of  a  prolepsis  derives 
some  confirmation  from  the  orignal  Hebrew,  which  he  renders* 
1  On  the  sixth  day  God  completed  all  the  work  which  he  had  to  do  ; 
and  on  the  seventh  day,  ceased  from  doing  any  of  his  works 
God,  therefore,  blessed  the  seventh  day,  and  made  it  holy,  because 
on  it  he  ceased  from  all  his  works,  which  he  had  ordained  to  do.' 
This  version,  he  says,  is  '  in  the  supposition  that  the  writer  refers 
to  the  Jewish  Sabbath  :'  of  course  it  was  designedly  adapted  to  an 
hypothesis  ;  but,  notwithstanding  this  suspicious  circumstance,  it  is 
not  easy  to  determine  how  it  differs  in  sense  from  the  received 
translation,  as  it  leaves  the  question  entirely  undecided  when  this 
blessing  and  sanctification  took  place.  The  proposed  version, 
however,  is  opposed  by  those  in  the  Polyglott,  and  by  the  gene- 
rality of  translators,  who  render  the  particle  van  at  the  beginning 
of  the  third  verse,  as  a  copulative,  not  as  an  illative  ;  and  it  is  sur^ 
prising  how  a  sound  Hebrew  scholar  can  translate  it  otherwise. 
In  short,  nothing  can  be  more  violent  and  unnatural  than  the 
proleptical  interpretation ;  and  if  we  add,  that  it  rests  upon  the 
unproved  assumption,  that  the  record  in  question  was  written  after 
the  delivery  of  the  law,  it  must  appear  so  devoid  of  critical  support, 
as  not  to  require  a  moment's  hesitation  in  rejecting  it." (2) 

So  satisfactorily  does  it  appear  that  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath 
is  historically  narrated  in  Genesis  ;  and  it  follows  from  thence,  that 

(2)  Holde'n  On  the  SaUalh. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  20 1 

the  law  of  the  Sabbath  is  universal,  and  not  peculiar  to  the  Jews. 
God  blessed  and  sanctified  it,  not  certainly  for  himself,  but  for  his 
creatures ;  that  it  might  be  a  day  of  special  blessing  to  them,  and 
be  set  apart,  not  only  from  unholy  acts,  for  they  are  forbidden  on 
every  day ;  but  from  common  uses.  It  was  thus  stamped  with  a 
hallowed  character  from  the  commencement,  and  in  works  of  a 
hallowed  character  ought  it  therefore  to  be  employed. 

The  obligation  of  a  Sabbatical  observance  upon  Christians  being 
thus  established,  the  inquiry  which  naturally  follows,  is,  In  what 
manner  is  this  great  festival,  at  once  so  ancient  and  so  venerable,, 
and  intended  to  commemorate  events  so  illustrious  and  so  import- 
ant to  mankind,  to  be  celebrated  ?  Many  have  spoken  of  the 
difficulty  of  settling  rules  of  this  kind  ;  but  this  will  oridinarily 
vanish,  if  we  consent  to  be  guided  fully  by  the  principles  of 
•Scripture. 

We  allow  that  it  requires  judgment,  and  prudence,  and  charity, 
and,  above  all,  a  mind  well  disposed  to  the  spiritual  employment  of 
the  Sabbath,  to  make  a  right  application  of  the  law.  But  this  is 
the  case  with  other  precepts  also  ;  such,  for  instance,  as  the  loving 
our  neighbour  as  ourselves  :  with  respect  to  which  we  seldom  hear 
any  complaint  of  difficulty  in  the  application.  But,  even  if  some 
want  of  special  direction  should  be  felt,  this  can  only  affect  minor 
details  ;  and  probably  the  matter  has  been  so  left  by  the  Lawgiver, 
to  "try  us,  and  prove  us,  and  to  know  what  is  in  our  heart.'* 
Something  may  have  been  reserved,  in  this  case,  for  the  exercise 
of  spontaneous  obedience  ;  for  that  generous  construction  of  the 
precept  which  will  be  dictated  by  devotion  and  gratitude  ;  and  for 
the  operation  of  a  feeling  of  indignant  shame,  that  the  only  day 
which  God  has  reserved  for  himself,  should  be  grudged  to  him, 
and  trenched  upon  by  every  petty  excuse  of  convenience,  interest, 
or  sloth,  and  pared  down,  and  negociated  for,  in  the  spirit  of  one 
who  seeks  to  overreach  another.  Of  this  we  may  be  assured,  that 
he  who  is  most  anxious  to  find  exceptions  to  the  general  rule,  will, 
in  most  cases,  be  a  defaulter  upon  even  his  own  estimate  of  the 
general  duty. 

The  only  real  difficulties  with  which  men  have  entangled  them- 
selves, have  arisen  from  the  want  of  clear  and  decided  views  of 
the  law  of  the  Sabbath  as  it  is  a  matter  of  express  revelation. 
There  are  two  extremes,  either  of  which  must  be  fertile  of  per- 
plexity. The  first  is,  to  regard  the  Sabbath  as  a  prudential 
institution,  adopted  by  the  primitive  Church,  and  resting  upon  civil 
and  ecclesiastical  authority  ;  a  notion  which  has  been  above  refuted. 
For  if  this  theory  bo  adopted,  it  is  impossible  to  find  satisfactory 


262  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

rules,  either  in  the  Old  or  New  Testament,  applicahle  to  the  sub- 
ject ;  and  we  may  therefore  cease  to  wonder  at  that  variety  of 
opinions,  and  those  vacillations  between  duty  and  license,  which 
have  been  found  in  different  Churches,  and  among  their  theologi- 
cal writers.  The  difficulty  of  establishing  any  rule  at  all,  to  which 
conscience  is  strictly  amenable,  is  then  evident,  and  indeed  entirely 
insuperable  ;  and  men  in  vain  attempt  to  make  a  partial  Sabbath 
by  their  own  authority,  when  they  reject  "  the  day  which  the  Lord 
hath  made."  If,  on  the  other  hand,  a  proper  distinction  is  not 
preserved  between  the  moral  law  of  the  Jews,  which  re-enacts 
the  still  more  ancient  institution  of  the  Sabbath,  (a  law  we  have 
seen  to  be  obligatory  upon  all  Christians,  to  the  end  of  time,)  and 
the  political  and  ceremonial  law  of  that  people,  which  contains 
particular  rules  as  to  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath ;  fixing  both 
the  day  on  which  it  was  to  be  held,  viz.  the  seventh  of  the  week, 
and  issuing  certain  prohibitions  not  applicable  to  all  people  ;  which 
branch  of  the  Mosaic  Law  was  brought  to  an  end  by  Christ, — diffi- 
culties will  arise  from  this  quarter.  One  difficulty  will  respect  the 
day ;  another  the  hour  of  the  diurnal  circle  from  which  the  Sab- 
bath must  commence.  Other  difficulties  will  arise  from  the  incon- 
venience or  impossibility  of  accommodating  the  Judaical  precepts 
to  countries  and  manners  totally  dissimilar ;  and  others,  from  the 
degree  of  civil  delinquency  and  punitiveness  with  which  violations 
of  the  Sabbath  ought  to  be  marked  in  a  Christian  state.  The  kin- 
dling of  fires,  for  instance,  in  their  dwellings  was  forbidden  to  the 
Jews ;  but  for  extending  this  to  harsher  climates,  there  is  no 
authority.  This  rule  would  make  the  Sabbath  a  day  of  bodilj 
suffering,  and,  in  some  cases,  of  danger  to  health,  which  is  incon- 
sistent with  that  merciful  and  festival  character  which  the  Sabbath 
was  designed  every  where  to  bear.  The  same  observation  may 
apply  to  the  cooking  of  victuals,  which  was  also  prohibited  to  the 
Jews  by  express  command.  To  the  gathering  of  sticks  on  the  Sab- 
bath the  penalty  of  death  was  assigned,  on  one  occasion,  for  reasons 
probably  arising  out  of  the  Theocratical  government  of  the  Jews  , 
but  surely  this  is  no  precedent  for  making  the  violation  of  the 
Sabbath  a  capital  crime  in  the  code  of  a  Christian  country. 

Between  the  Decalogue,  and  the  political  and  ceremonial  law* 
which  followed,  there  is  a  marked  distinction,  They  were  given  at 
7 wo  different  times,  and  in  a  different  manner;  and,  above  all,  the 
former  is  referred  to  in  the  New  Testament,  as  of  perpetual  obli- 
gation ;  the  other  as  peculiar,  and  as  abolished  by  Christ.  It  does 
not  follow,  however,  from  this,  that  those  precepts  in  the  Levitical 
^Qde.  which  relate  to  the  Sabbath,  are  of  no  use  to  us,   Thev  show 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  2C3 

lis  how  the  general  law  was  carried  into  its  detail  of  application  by 
the  great  Legislator,  who  condescended  to  be  at  once  a  civil  and 
an  ecclesiastical  Governor  of  a  chosen  people ;  and  though  they 
are  not  in  all  respects  binding  upon  us,  in  their  full  form,  they  all 
embody  general  interpretations  of  the  fourth  command  of  the  De- 
calogue, to  which,  as  far  as  they  are  applicable  to  a  people  otherwise 
circumstanced,  respect  is  reverently  and  devoutly  to  be  had.  The 
prohibition  to  buy  and  sell  on  the  Sabbath  is  as  applicable  to  us  a? 
to  the  Jews ;  so  is  that  against  travelling  on  the  Sabbath,  except 
for  purposes  of  religion,  which  was  allowed  to  them  also.  If  we 
may  lawfully  kindle  fires  in  our  dwellings,  yet  we  may  learn  from 
the  law  peculiar  to  the  Jews,  to  keep  domestic  services  under  re- 
straint ;  if  we  may  cook  victuals  for  necessity  and  comfort,  we  are  to 
be  restrained  from  feasting ;  if  violations  of  the  Sabbath  are  not  to 
be  made  capital  crimes  by  Christian  governors,  the  enforcement  of 
a  decent  external  observance  of  the  rest  of  the  Sabbath  is  a  lawful 
use  of  power,  and  a  part  of  the  duty  of  a  Christian  magistrate. 

But  the  rules  by  which  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  is  clearly 
explained,  will  be  found  in  abundant  copiousness  and  evidence  in 
the  original  command ;  in  the  Decalogue ;  in  incidental  passages 
of  Scripture,  which  refer  not  so  much  to  the  political  law  of  the 
Jews,  as  to  the  universal  moral  code  ;  and  in  the  discourses  and 
acts  of  Christ,  and  his  Apostles :  so  that,  independent  of  the 
Levitical  code,  we  have  abundant  guidance.  It  is  a  day  of  rest 
from  worldly  pursuits ;  a  day  sanctified,  that  is,  set  apart  for  hoi} 
uses,  which  are  the  proper  and  the  only  lawful  occupations  of  the 
day ;  it  is  a  day  of  public  worship,  or,  as  it  is  expressed  in  the 
Mosaic  law,  "  of  holy  convocation,"  or  assembly  ; — a  day  for  the 
exercise  of  mercy  to  man  and  beast ; — a  day  for  the  devout  com- 
memoration, by  religious  acts  and  meditations,  of  the  creation  and 
redemption  of  the  world  ;  and,  consequently,  for  the  cultivation  ol 
that  spirit  which  is  suitable  to  such  exercises,  by  laying  aside  all 
worldly  cares  and  pleasures ;  to  which  holy  exercises  there  is  to  be 
a  full  appropriation  of  the  seventh  part  of  our  time ;  necessary  sleep, 
and  engagements  of  real  necessity,  as  explained  by  our  Saviour, 
only  being  excluded. 

Works  of  charity  and  mercy  were  not  excluded  by  the  rigoui 
of  the  Mosaic  Law,  much  less  by  the  Christian  dispensation. 
The  rule  of  doing  good  on  the  Sabbath  day  has,  however,  some- 
times been  interpreted  with  too  much  laxity,  without  considering 
that  such  acts  form  no  part  of  the  reason  for  which  that  day  was 
sanctified,  and  that  they  are  therefore  to  be  grounded  upon  the 
necessity  of  immediate  exertion.     The  secularly  connected   witb 


264  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

certain  public  Charities  has  often  been  pushed  beyond  this  rule 
of  necessity,  and  as  such  has  become  unlawful. 

The  reason  generally  given  for  this,  is,  that  men  cannot  be  found 
to  give  time  on  the  week  day  to  the  management  of  such  Charities  : 
and  they  will  never  be  found,  whilst  the  rule  is  brought  down  to 
convenience.  Men's  principles  are  to  be  raised,  and  not  the  com- 
mand lowered.  And  when  Ministers  perscveringly  do  their  duty, 
and  but  a  few  conscientious  persons  support  them,  the  whole  will 
be  found  practicable  and  easy.  Charities  are  pressed  either  upon 
our  feelings  or  our  interests,  and  sometimes  on  both ;  and  when 
they  become  really  urgent,  time  will  be  found  for  their  manage- 
ment, without  "robbing  God,"  and  laying  down  that  most  debasing 
of  all  principles,  that  our  sacrifices  are  to  cost  us  nothing.  The 
teaching  of  writing  in  Sunday  schools  has  been  pleaded  for  on  the 
same  assumed  ground  of  necessity  ;  but  in  all  well  and  religiously 
conducted  institutions  of  this  kind,  it  has  been  found  quite  practi- 
cable to  accomplish  the  object  in  a  lawful  manner ;  and  even  if  it 
had  not,  there  was  no  obligation  binding  as  to  that  practice,  equal 
to  that  which  binds  us  to  obey  the  law  of  God.  It  is  a  work  which 
comes  not  under  any  of  our  Lord's  exceptions  :  it  may  be  a  bene- 
volent thing ;  but  it  has  in  it  no  character  of  mercy,  either  to  the 
bodies  or  to*  the  souls  of  men. 

As  to  amusements  and  recreations,  which,  when  "innocent" 
that  is,  we  suppose,  not  "immoral,"  are  sometimes  pleaded  for 
by  persons  who  advocate  the  serious  observance  of  the  Lord's 
day,  but  a  few  words  are  necessary.  If  to  public  worship  we  arc 
to  add  a  more  than  ordinary  attention  to  the  duties  of  the  family 
and  the  closet,  which  all  such  persons  allow,  then  there  is  little 
time  for  recreation  and  amusement ;  and  if  there  were,  the  heart 
which  is  truly  impressed  with  duties  so  sacred,  and  has  entered 
into  their  spirit,  can  have  no  relish  for  them.  Against  every  tempt- 
ation of  this  kind,  the  words  of  the  pious  Archbishop  Dawes  may 
serve  as  a  salutary  admonition  : — 

"  Dost  thou  require  of  me,  O  Lord,  but  one  day  in  seven  for 
thy  more  especial  service,  when  as  all  my  times,  all  my  days,  are 
thy  due  tribute,  and  shall  I  grudge  thee  that  one  day]  Have  I 
but  one  day  in  the  week,  a  peculiar  season  of  nurturing  and  train- 
ing up  my  soul  for  heavenly  happiness,  and  shall  I  think  the  whole 
of  this  too  much,  and  judge  my  duties  at  an  end,  when  the  public- 
offices  of  the  Church  are  only  ended  1  Ah  !  where,  in  such  a  case, 
is  my  zeal,  my  sincerity,  my  constancy,  and  perseverance  of  holy 
obedience  %  Where  my  love  unto,  my  delight  and  relish  in,  pious 
performances  ?    Would  those  that  are  thus  but  half  Christians  be 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  365 

content  to  be  half  saved  1  Would  those  who  are  thus  not  far  from 
the  kingdom  of  heaven,  be  willing  to  be  utterly  excluded  thence 
for  arriving  no  nearer  to  a  due  observance  of  the  Lord's  day  1  Am 
I  so  afraid  of  sabbatizing  with  the  Jews,  that  I  carelessly  omit  keep- 
ing the  day  as  a  good  Christian  1  Where  can  be  the  harm  of  over- 
doing in  God's  worship,  suppose  I  could  overdo  1  But  when  my 
Saviour  has  told  me,  after  I  have  done  all,  I  am  still  an  unprofitable 
servant,  where  is  the  hazard,  where  the  possibility,  of  doing  too 
much ;  whereas  in  doing  too  little,  in  falling  short  of  performing 
a  due  obedience  on  the  Sabbath,  I  may  also  fall  short  of  eter- 
nal life  ?" 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Morals  ; — Duties  to  our  Neighbour. 

When  our  duty  to  others  is  summed  up  in  the  general  epitome 
of  the  second  table,  "Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself;" 
although  love  must  be  so  taken  as  to  include  many  other  princi- 
ples and  acts,  yet  we  are  thereby  taught  the  source  from  which 
they  truly  spring,  when  performed  evangelically,  and  also  that 
universal  charity  is  to  be  the  habitual  and  reigning  affection  of 
the  heart,  in  all  our  relations  to  our  fellow  creatures. 

This  affection  is  to  be  considered  in  its  source. 

That  source  is  a  regenerated  state  of  mind.  We  have  shown 
that  the  love  of  God  springs  from  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
those  who  are  justified  by  faith  in  Christ,  and  that  every  sentiment 
which,  in  any  other  circumstances,  assumes  this  designation,  is 
imperfect  or  simulated.  We  make  the  same  remark  as  to  the  Jove 
of  our  neighbour.  It  is  an  imperfect  or  simulated  sentiment,  if  it 
flow  not  from  the  love  of  God,  the  sure  mark  of  a  regenerate 
nature.  We  here  also  see  the  superior  character  of  Christian  mo- 
rals, and  of  morals  when  kept  in  connexion,  as  they  ought  always 
to  be,  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  and  their  operation  in  the 
heart.  There  may,  indeed,  be  a  degree  of  natural  benevolence ; 
the  indirect  influence  of  a  benevolent  nature  may  counteract  the 
selfish  and  the  malevolent  feelings  ;  and  education,  when  well 
directed,  will  come  in  to  the  aid  of  nature.  Yet  the  principle,  as  a 
religious  one,  and  in  its  full  operation,  can  only  result  from  a 
•supernatural  change  of  our  nature,  because  that  only  can  subdue 

Vol.  III.  31 


26Q  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PAfc1? 

those  affections  which  counteract  benevolence  and  charity  in  their 
efficient  and  habitual  manifestations. 
This  affection  is  also  to  be  considered  in  respect  of  what  it 

EXCLUDES. 

It  excludes  all  anger  beyond  that  degree  of  resentment  which  a 
culpable  action  in  another  may  call  forth,  in  order  to  mark  the 
sense  we  entertain  of  its  evil,  and  to  impress  that  evil  upon  the 
offender,  so  that  we  may  lead  him  to  repent  of  it,  and  forsake  it. 
This  seems  the  proper  rule  by  which  to  distinguish  lawful  anger 
from  that  which  is  contrary  to  charity,  and  therefore  malevolent 
and  sinful.  It  excludes  implacability ;  for  if  we  do  not  promptly 
and  generously  forgive  others  their  trespasses,  this  is  deemed  to  be 
so  great  a  violation  of  that  law  of  love  which  ought  to  bind  men 
together,  that  our  heavenly  Father  will  not  forgive  us.  It  excludes 
all  revenge ;  so  that  we  are  to  exact  no  punishment  of  another  for 
offences  against  ourselves :  and  though  it  be  lawful  to  call  in  the 
penalties  of  the  laws  for  crimes  against  society,  yet  this  is  never  to 
be  done  on  the  principle  of  private  revenge  ;  but  on  the  public 
ground^  that  law  and  government  are  ordained  of  God,  which  pro- 
duces a  case  that  comes  under  the  inspired  rule,  "  Vengeance  is 
mine  ;  I  will  repay,  saith  the  Lord."  It  excludes  all  prejudice ;  by 
which  is  meant  a  harsh  construction  of  men's  motives  and  charac- 
ters upon  surmise,  or  partial  knowledge  of  the  facts,  accompanied 
with  an  inclination  to  form  an  ill  opinion  of  them  in  the  absence  ot 
proper  evidence.  This  appears  to  be  what  the  Apostle  Paul  means, 
when  he  says,  "  Charity  thinketh  no  evil."  It  excludes  all  censo- 
riousness  or  evil  speaking,  when  the  end  is  not  the  correction  of  the 
offender,  or  when  a  declaration  of  the  truth  as  to  one  person  is  not 
required  by  our  love  and  duty  to  another ;  for  whenever  the  end  is 
merely  to  lower  a  person  in  the  estimation  of  others,  it  is  resolvable 
solely  into  a  splenetic  and  immoral  feeling.  It  excludes  all  those 
aggressions,  whether  petty  or  more  weighty,  which  may  be  made 
upon  the  interests  of  another,  when  the  law  of  the  case,  or  even 
the  abstract  right,  might  not  be  against  our  claim.  These  are 
always  complex  cases,  and  can  but  occasionally  occur ;  but  the 
rule  which  binds  us  to  do  unto  others  as  we  would  they  should  do 
unto  us,  binds  us  to  act  upon  the  benevolent  view  of  the  case  ;  and 
to  forego  the  rigidness  of  right.  Finally,  it  excludes,  as  limitations 
to  its  exercise,  all  those  artificial  distinctions  which  have  been  cre- 
ated by  men,  or  by  providential  arrangements,  or  by  accidental 
circumstances.  Men  of  all  nations,  of  all  colours,  of  all  conditions, 
are  the  objects  of  the  unlimited  precept,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy 
neighbour  as  thyself."  Kind  feelings  produced  by  natural  instincts. 


VHIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  2Q"t 

by  intercourse,  by  country,  may  call  the  love  of  our  neighbour  into 
warmer  exercise  as  to  individuals  or  classes  of  men,  or  these  may 
be  considered  as  distinct  and  special,  though  similar  affections 
superadded  to  this  universal  charity ;  but  as  to  all  men,  this  charity 
is  an  efficient  affection,  excluding  all  ill  will,  and  all  injury. 

But  its  active  expression  remains  to  be  considered. 

It  is  not  a  merely  negative  affection ;  but  it  brings  forth  rich 
and  varied  fruit.  It  produces  a  feeling  of  delight  in  the  happiness 
of  others,  and  thus  destroys  envy  ;  it  is  the  source  of  sympathy  and 
compassion;  it  opens  the  hand  in  liberality  for  the  supply  of  the 
wants  of  others  ;  it  gives  cheerfulness  to  every  service  undertaken 
in  the  cause  of  others ;  it  resists  the  wrong  which  may  be  inflicted 
upon  them ;  and  it  will  run  hazards  of  health  and  life  for  their 
sakes.  It  has  special  respect  to  the  spiritual  interests  and  salvation 
of  men ;  and  thus  it  instructs,  persuades,  reproves  the  ignorant  and 
vicious ;  counsels  the  simple ;  comforts  the  doubting  and  perplexed ; 
and  rejoices  in  those  gifts  and  graces  of  others,  by  which  society 
may  be  enlightened  and  purified.  The  zeal  of  Apostles,  the  patience 
of  Martyrs,  the  travels  and  labours  of  Evangelists  in  the  first  ages, 
were  all  animated  by  this  affection  ;  and  the  earnestness  of  Preach- 
ers in  all  ages,  and  the  more  private  labours  of  Christians  for  the 
benefit  of  the  souls  of  men,  with  the  operations  of  those  voluntary 
associations  which  send  forth  Missionaries  to  the  Heathen,  or  dis- 
tribute Bibles  and  Tracts,  or  conduct  Schools,  are  all  its  visible 
expressions  before  the  world.  A  principle  of  philanthropy  may  be 
conceived  to  exist  independent  of  the  influence  of  active  and  effi- 
cient Christianity ;  but  it  has  always  expended  itself  either  in  good 
wishes,  or,  at  most,  in  feeble  efforts,  chiefly  directed  to  the  mitiga- 
tion of  a  little  temporary  external  evil.  Except  in  connexion  with 
religion,  and  that  the  religion  of  the  heart,  wrought  and  maintained 
there,  by  the  acknowledged  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  love 
of  mankind  has  never  exhibited  itself  under  such  views  and  acts  as 
those  we  have  just  referred  to.  It  has  never  been  found  in  cha- 
racters naturally  selfish  and  obdurate  ;  has  never  disposed  men  to 
make  great  and  painful  sacrifices  for  others ;  never  sympathized 
with  spiritual  wretchedness  ;  never  been  called  forth  into  its  high- 
est exercises  by  considerations  drawn  from  the  immortal  relations 
of  man  to  eternity ;  never  originated  large  plans  for  the  illumination 
and  moral  culture  of  society ;  never  fixed  upon  the  grand  object  to 
which  it  is  now  bending  the  hearts,  the  interests,  and  hopes  of  the 
universal  Church,  the  conversion  of  the  world.  Philanthropy,  in 
systems  of  mere  ethics,  like  their  love  of  God,  is  a  greatly  inferior 
principle  to  that  which  is  enjoined  by  Christianity,  and  infused  b\ 


268  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

its  influence  ; — another  proof  of  the  folly  of  separating  morals  from 
revealed  truth,  and  of  the  necessity  of  cultivating  them  upon  evan- 
gelical principles. 

The  same  conclusion  will  be  established,  if  we  consider  those 
works  of  mercy  which  the  principle  of  universal  philanthropy 
will  dictate,  and  which  form  a  large  portion  of  our  "  duty  to  our 
neighbour."    It  is  more  the  design  of  this  part  of  the  present  work, 
to  exhibit  the  peculiar  nature  and  perfection  of  the  morals  of 
Christianity,  than  to  consider  moral  duties  in  detail ;  and,  there- 
fore, it  is  only  necessary  to  assume  what  is  obvious  to  all,  that  the 
exercise  of  practical  mercy  to  the  needy  and  miserable,  is  a  moral 
duty  clearly  revealed,  including  also  the  application  of  a  part  of 
our  property  to  benefit  mankind  in  other  respects,  as  we  have 
opportunity.     But  let  us  ask,  under  what  rules  can  the  quantum 
of  our  exertions  in  doing  good  to  others  be  determined,  except  by 
the  authority  of  revealed  religion'?     It  is  clear  that  there  is  an 
antagonist  principle  of  selfishness  in  man,  which  counteracts  our 
charities;  and  that  the  demands  of  personal  gratification,  and  ol 
family  interests,  and  of  show  and  expense  in  our  modes  of  living. 
are  apt  to  take  up  so  large  a  share  of  what  remains  after  our  neces- 
sities, and  the  lawful  demands  of  station,  and  a  prudent  provision 
for  old  age  and  for  our  families  after  our  decease,  are  met,  that  a 
very  small  portion  is  wont  to  be  considered  as  lawfully  disposable, 
under  all  these  considerations,  for  purposes  of  general  beneficence. 
If  we  have  no  rules  or  principles,  it  is  clear  that  the  most  limited 
efforts  may  pass  for  very  meritorious  acts  ;  or  that  they  will  be  left 
to  be  measured  only  by  the  different  degrees  of  natural  compassion 
in  man,  or  by  some  immoral  principle,  such  as  the  love  of  human 
praise.    There  is  nothing  in  any  mere  system  of  morals  to  direct 
in  such  cases  ;  certainly  nothing  to  compel  either  the  principles  or 
the  heart.    Here  then  we  shall  see  also  in  how  different  a  predica- 
ment this  interesting  branch  of  morality  stands,  when  kept  in  close 
and  inseparable  connexion  with  Christianity.     It  is  true,  that  we 
have  no  specific  rule  as  to  the  quantum  of  our  givings  in  the  Scrip- 
tures ;  and  the  reason  of  this  is  not  inapparent.    Such  a  rule  must 
have  been  branched  out  into  an  inconvenient  number  of  detailed 
directions  to  meet  every  particular  case  ;  it  must  have  respected 
the  different  and  changing  states  of  society  and  civilization ;  it 
must  have  controlled  men's  savings  as  well  as  givings,  because 
the  latter  are  dependent  upon  them ;  it  must  have  prescribed 
modes  of  dress,  and  modes  of  living :  all  which  would  have  left 
cases  still  partially  touched  or  wholly  unprovided  for,  and  the 
multiplicity  of  rules  might  have  been  a  trap  to  our  consciences. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  269 

rather  than  the  means  of  directing  them.  There  is  also  a  more 
general  reason  for  this  omission.  The  exercise  of  mercy  is  a  work 
o(  the  affections  ;  it  must  have,  therefore,  something  free  and  spon- 
taneous in  it ;  and  it  was  designed  to  be  voluntary,  that  the  moral 
effect  produced  upon  society  might  be  to  bind  men  together  in  a 
softer  bond,  and  to  call  forth  reciprocally  good  affections.  To  this 
the  stern  character  of  particular  laws  would  have  been  inimical. 
Christianity  teaches  mercy,  by  general  principles,  which  at  once 
sufficiently  direct  and  leave  to  the  heart  the  free  play  of  its 
affections. 

The  general  law  is  express  and  unequivocal :  "  As  ye  have 
opportunity  do  good  unto  all  men,  and  especially  to  them  that 
are  of  the  household  of  faith."  "  To  do  good  and  to  communicate 
forget  not,  for  with  such  sacrifices  God  is  well  pleased."  A  most 
important  and  influential  principle,  to  be  found  in  no  mere  system 
of  ethics,  is  also  contained  in  the  revelation  of  a  particular  relation 
in  which  we  all  stand  to  God,  and  on  which  we  must  be  judged  at 
the  last  day.  We  are  "  stewards,"  "  servants,"  to  whom  the  great 
Master  has  committed  his  "goods,"  to  be  used  according  to  his 
directions.  We  have  nothing,  therefore,  of  our  own,  no  right  in 
property,  except  under  the  conditions  on  which  it  is  committed  to 
us ;  and  we  must  give  an  account  for  our  use  of  it,  according  to 
the  rule.  A  rule  of  proportion  is  also  in  various  passages  of  Scrip- 
ture expressly  laid  down  .  "Where  little  is  given,  little  is  required  ; 
where  much  is  given,  much  is  required."  "  For  if  there  be  first  a 
willing  mind,  it  is  accepted  according  to  what  a  man  hath,  and  not 
according  to  what  he  hath  not."  It  is  a  further  rule,  that  our  cha- 
rities should  be  both  cheerful  and  abundant.  "  Sec  that  ye  abound 
in  this  grace  also,"  "  not  grudgingly,  or  of  necessity,  for  God  loveth 
a  cheerful  giver."  These  general  rules  and  principles  being  laid 
down,  the  appeal  is  made  to  the  heart,  and  men  are  left  to  the 
influence  of  the  spiritual  and  grateful  affections  excited  there. 
All  the  venerable  examples  of  Scripture  are  brought  to  bear  upon 
ihe  free  and  liberal  exercises  of  beneficence,  crowned  with  the 
example  of  our  Saviour  :  "  Ye  know  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  that,  though  he  was  rich,  yet  for  your  sakes  he  became 
poor,  that  ye  through  his  poverty  might  become  rich."  An  appeal 
is  made  to  man's  gratitude  for  the  blessings  of  Providence  to  him- 
self, and  he  is  enjoined  to  give  "  as  the  Lord  hath  prospered  him." 
Our  fellow  creatures  are  constantly  presented  to  us  under  tender 
relations,  as  our  "  brethren ;"  or,  more  particularly,  as  "  of  the 
household  of  faith."  Special  promises  are  made  of  God's  favour  and 
lilessing,  as  the  reward  of  such  acts  in  the  present  life  :  "And  God 

31* 


270  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

is  able  to  make  all  grace  abound  toward  you,  that  ye,  always  hav- 
ing all  sufficiency  in  all  things,  may  abound  to  every  good  work  ;" 
and  finally,  although  every  notion  of  merit  is  excluded,  yet  the 
rewards  of  eternity  are  represented  as  to  be  graciously  dispensed, 
so  as  specially  to  distinguish  and  honour  every  "  work  of  faith," 
and  "labour  of  love."  Under  so  powerful  an  authority,  so  explicit 
a  general  directory,  and  so  effectual  an  excitement,  is  this  branch  ol 
morality  placed  by  the  Gospel. 

As  our  religion  enjoins  charity,  so  also  it  prescribes  justice. 
as  a  mutual  dependence  has  been  established  among  men,  so  also 
there  are  mutual  rights,  in  the  rendering  of  which  to  each  other, 
justice,  when  considered  as  a  social  virtue,  consists. 

Various  definitions  and  descriptions  of  justice  are  found  among 
moralists  and  jurists,  of  different  degrees  of  importance  and  utilit} 
to  those  who  write,  and  to  those  who  study,  formal  treatises  on  its 
collective  or  separate  branches.  The  distribution  of  justiee  into 
Ethical,  Economical,  and  Political,  is  more  suited  to  our  purpose, 
and  is  sufficiently  comprehensive.  The  First  considers  all  mankind 
as  on  a  level ;  the  Second  regards  them  as  associated  into  families, 
under  the  several  relations  of  husband  and  wife,  parents  and 
children,  masters  and  servants ;  and  the  Third  comprehends  them 
as  united  into  public  states,  and  obliged  to  certain  duties,  either  as 
magistrates  or  people.  On  all  these  the  rules  of  conduct  in 
Scripture  are  explicit  and  forcible. 

Ethical  Justice,  as  it  considers  mankind  as  on  a  level,  chiefly 
therefore  respects  what  are  usually  called  men's  natural  rights, 
which  are  briefly  summed  up  in  three, — life,  property,  and  liberty, 

The  natural  right  to  Life  is  guarded  by  the  precept,  "  Thou 
*halt  not  kill ;"  and  it  is  also  limited  by  the  more  ancient  injunction 
to  the  sons  of  Noah,  "  Whoso  sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man  shall 
his  blood  be  shed."  In  a  state  of  society,  indeed,  this  right  may 
be  further  limited  by  a  government,  and  capital  punishments  be 
extended  to  other  crimes,  (as  we  see  in  the  Mosaic  law,)  provided 
the  law  be  equally  binding  on  all  offenders,  and  rest  upon  the 
necessity  of  the  case,  as  determined  by  the  good  of  the  whole 
community  ;  and  also  that  in  every  country  professing  Christianity, 
the  merciful  as  well  as  the  righteous  character  of  that  religion  be 
suffered  to  impress  itself  upon  its  legislation.  But  against  all 
individual  authority  the  life  of  man  is  absolutely  secured ;  and 
not  only  so,  but  anger,  which  is  the  first  principle  of  violence,  and 
which  proceeds  first  to  malignity  and  revenge,  and  then  to  personal 
injuries,  is  prohibited,  under  the  penalty  of  the  Divine  wrath;  a 
'ofry  proof  of  the  superior  character  of  the  Christian  rule  of  justicr. 


iHIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  271 

In  Properly,  lawfully  acquired,  that  is,  acquired  without  injury 
to  others,  every  man  has  also  a  natural  right.  This  right  also  may 
be  restrained  in  society,  without  injustice,  seeing  it  is  but  the  price 
which  every  man  pays  for  protection,  and  other  advantages  of  the 
social  state  ;  but  here  also  the  necessity  of  the  case,  resting  upon 
the  benefit  of  the  community,  is  to  be  the  rule  of  this  modification 
of  the  natural  claim.  The  law  too  must  lie  equally  upon  all,  cceteris 
paribus;  and  every  individual  whose  right  of  property  is  thu? 
interfered  with  must  have  his  due  share  of  the  common  advantage. 
Against  individual  aggression  the  right  of  property  is  secured  by 
the  Divine  law,  "  Thou  shalt  not  steal ;"  and  by  another  law  which 
carries  the  restraint  up  to  the  very  principle  of  justice  in  the  heart, 
"  Thou  shalt  not  covet ;"  covetousness  being  that  corrupt  affection 
from  which  injuries  done  to  others  in  their  property  arise.  The 
Christian  injunction,  to  be  "  content  with  such  things  as  we  have," 
is  another  important  security.  The  rule  which  binds  rulers  and 
governments  in  their  interferences  with  this  natural  right  oi 
property,  comes  under  the  head  of  political  justice. 

Liberty  is  another  natural  right,  which  by  individual  authority. 
at  least,  cannot  be  interfered  with.  Hence  "  man  stealing,"  the 
object  of  which  is  to  reduce  another  to  slavery,  by  obtaining  forci- 
ble possession  of  his  person,  and  compelling  his  labour,  is  ranked 
with  crimes  of  the  greatest  magnitude  in  the  New  Testament ; 
and  against  it  the  special  vengeance  of  God  is  threatened.  By  the 
Jewish  law  also,  it  was  punished  with  death.  How  far  the  natural 
right  which  every  man  has  to  his  own  liberty  may,  like  the  natural 
light  to  property,  be  restrained  by  public  authority,  is  a  point  on 
which  different  opinions  have  been  held.  Prisoners  of  war  were 
formerly  considered  to  be  absolute  captives,  the  right  of  which 
claim  is  involved  in  the  question  of  the  right  of  war.  Where  one 
can  be  justified,  so  may  the  other ;  since  a  surrender  of  the  person 
in  war  is  the  commutation  of  liberty  for  life.*  In  the  more 
humane  practice  of  modern  warfare,  an  exchange  of  prisoners  is 
effected  ;  but  even  this  supposes  an  acquired  right  on  each  side  in 
the  prisoners,  and  a  commutation  by  an  exchange.  Should  the 
progeny  of  such  prisoners  of  Avar,  doomed,  as  by  ancient  custom.. 

*  Montesquieu  says,  "  it  is  false  that  killing  in  war  is  lawful,  unless  in  a  case  of 
absolute  necessity :  but  when  a  man  has  made  another  his  slave,  he  cannot  be  said 
to  have  been  under  a  necessity  of  taking  away  his  life,  since  he  actually  did  not 
lake  it  away.  War  gives  no  other  right  over  prisoners  than  to  disable  them  from 
doing  any  farther  harm,  by  securing  their  persons." — And  "  if  a  prisoner  of  war  is- 
not  to  be  reduced  to  slavery,  much  less  are  his  children."  This  reason,  therefore, 
with  others,  assigned  by  the  civilians  in  justification  of  slavery,  he  concludes  il 
"     Spm7  o/£au?s,  Book  xv,  ch,  ii. — American  Editors. 


2X2  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

to  perpetual  servitude,  be  also  kept  in  slavery,  and  the  purchase 
of  slaves  also  be  practised,  the  question  which  then  arises  is  one 
which  tries  the  whole  case  of  slavery,  as  far  as  public  law  is 
concerned.  Among  the  patriarchs  there  was  a  mild  species  of 
domestic  servitude,  distinct  from  that  of  captives  of  war.  Among 
the  Jews,  a  Hebrew  might  be  sold  for  debt,  or  sell  himself  when 
poor,  but  only  till  the  year  of  release.  After  that,  his  continuation 
in  a  state  of  slavery  was  perfectly  voluntary.  The  Jews  might, 
however,  hold  foreigners  as  slaves  for  life.  Michaelis  has  well 
observed,  that,  by  the  restrictions  of  his  law,  Moses  remarkably 
mitigated  the  rigours  of  slavery.  "  This  is,  as  it  were,  the  spirit  ol 
his  laws  respecting  it.  He  appears  to  have  regarded  it  as  a  hard- 
ship, and  to  have  disapproved  of  its  severities.  Hence  we  find  him, 
in  Deut.  xxiii,  15,  16,  ordaining  that  no  foreign  servant,  who 
sought  for  refuge  among  the  Israelites,  should  be  delivered  up  to 
his  master."  (3)  This  view  of  the  case,  we  may  add,  will  probably 
afford  the  reason  why  slavery  was  at  all  allowed  under  the  Jewish 
dispensation.  The  general  state  of  society  in  the  surrounding 
nations  might  perhaps  render  it  a  necessary  evil ;  but  in  othei 
countries  it  existed  in  forms  harsh  and  oppressive,  whilst  the  mer- 
ciful nature  of  the  Mosaic  Institute  impressed  upon  it  a  mild  and 
mitigated  character,  in  recognition  of  man's  natural  rights,  and  as 
an  example  to  other  countries.  And  to  show  how  great  a  contrast 
with  our  modern  colonial  slavery,  the  case  of  slaves  among  the 
Jews  presented,  we  may  remark,  that  all  foreign  slaves  were 
circumcised,  and  therefore  initiated  into  the  true  religion ;  that 
they  had  the  full  and  strict  advantage  of  the  Sabbath  confirmed  to 
them  by  express  statute ;  that  they  had  access  to  the  solemn 
religious  festivals  of  the  Jews,  and  partook  of  the  feasts  made  upon 
the  offerings ;  that  they  could  possess  property,  as  appears  from 
Lev.  xxv,  49,  and  2  Sam.  ix,  10;  and  that  all  the  fruits  which 
grew  spontaneously  during  the  Sabbatical  year  were  given  to 
them,  and  to  the  indigent.  Michaelis  has  also  showed,  that  not 
only  was  the  ox  not  muzzled  when  treading  out  the  corn,  but  that 
the  slaves  and  day  labourers  might  eat  without  restraint  of  the 
fruits  they  were  gathering  in  their  master's  service,  and  drink  of 
the  wine  they  pressed  from  the  wine  press.  (4)  The  Jewish  law- 
may  therefore  be  considered  not  so  much  as  controlling  the  natural 
light  which  man  has  to  liberty,  and  so  authorizing  the  infraction 
of  that  right  under  certain  circumstances,  but  as  coming  in  to 
ycgulate  and  to  soften  a  state  of  things  already  existing,  and  grown 

(3)  QomiWitarles  on  the  Lcncs  of  Moses,  (4)  Ibid.  Art,  ljjfo 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  273 

into  general  practice.  All,  therefore,  that  can  be  fairly  inferred 
from  the  existence  of  slavery  under  that  law,  is,  that  a  legislature, 
in  certain  cases,  may  be  justified  in  mitigating,  rather  than  abolish- 
ing, that  evil.  But  even  here,  since  the  Legislator  was  in  fact 
God,  whose  right  to  dispose  of  his  creatures  cannot  be  questioned, 
and  since  also  the  nations  neighbouring  to  the  Jews  were  under  a 
malediction  because  of  their  idolatries,  the  Jewish  law  can  be  no 
rule  to  a  Christian  state  ;  and  all  arguments  drawn  from  it  in  favour 
of  perpetual  slavery,  suppose  that  a  mere  earthly  legislature  is 
invested  with  the  powers  and  prerogatives  of  the  Divine  Legislator 
of  the  Jews,  which  of  course  vitiates  the  whole  reasoning. 

As  to  the  existence  of  slavery  in  Christian  states,  every  govern- 
ment, as  soon  as  it  professes  to  be  Christian,  binds  itself  to  be 
regulated  by  the  principles  of  the  New  Testament ;  and  though  a 
part  of  its  subjects  should  at  that  time  be  in  a  state  of  servitude, 
and  their  sudden  emancipation  might  be  obviously  an  injury  to 
society  at  large,  it  is  bound  to  show  that  its  spirit  and  tendency  is 
as  inimical  to  slavery  as  is  the  Christianity  which  it  professes.  All 
the  injustice  and  oppression  against  which  it  can  guard  that  con- 
dition, and  all  the  mitigating  regulations  it  can  adopt,  are  obligatory 
upon  it ;  and  since  also  every  Christian  slave  is  enjoined  by 
Apostolic  authority  to  choose  freedom,  when  it  is  possible  to  attain 
it,  as  being  a  better  state,  and  more  befitting  a  Christian  man,  so 
is  every  Christian  master  bound,  by  the  principle  of  loving  his 
neighbour,  and  more  especially  his  "  brother  in  Christ,"  as  himself, 
to  promote  his  passing  into  that  better  and  more  Christian  state. 
To  the  instruction  of  the  slaves  in  religion  would  every  such 
Christian  government  also  be  bound,  and  still  farther  to  adopt 
measures  for  the  final  extinction  of  slavery ;  the  rule  of  its  pro- 
ceeding  in  this  case  being  the  accomplishment  of  this  object  as 
soon  as  is  compatible  with  the  real  welfare  of  the  enslaved  portion 
of  its  subjects  themselves,  and  not  the  consideration  of  the  losses 
which  might  be  sustained  by  their  proprietors,  which,  however, 
ought  to  be  compensated  by  other  means,  as  far  as  they  are  just, 
and  equitably  estimated. 

If  this  be  the  mode  of  proceeding  clearly  pointed  out  by  Chris- 
tianity to  a  State  on  its  first  becoming  Christian,  when  previously, 
and  for  ages,  the  practice  of  slavery  had  grown  up  with  it ;  how 
much  more  forcibly  does  it  impose  its  obligation  upon  nations 
involved  in  the  guilt  of  the  modern  African  slavery  !  They  pro- 
fessed Christianity  when  they  commenced  the  practice.  They 
entered  upon  a  traffic  which  ab  initio  was,  upon  their  own  princi- 
ples, unjust  and  cruel   They  had  no  rights  of  war  to  plead  against 


274  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

the  natural  rights  of  the  first  captives ;  who  were  in  fact  stolen,  or 
purchased  from  the  stealers,  knowing  them  to  be  so.  The  govern- 
ments themselves  never  acquired  any  right  of  property  in  the  parents ; 
they  have  none  in  their  descendants,  and  can  acquire  none  ;  as  the 
thief  who  steals  cattle  cannot,  should  he  feed  and  defend  them, 
acquire  any  right  of  property,  either  in  them  or  the  stock  they  may 
produce,  although  he  should  be  at  the  charge  of  rearing  them. 
These  governments  not  having  a  right  of  property  in  their  colonial 
slaves,  could  not  transfer  any  right  of  property  in  them  to  their 
present  masters,  for  it  could  not  give  what  it  never  had ;  nor,  by 
its  connivance  at  the  robberies  and  purchases  of  stolen  human 
beings  alter  the  essential  injustice  of  the  transaction.  All  such 
governments  are  therefore  clearly  bound,  as  they  fear  God  and 
dread  his  displeasure,  to  restore  all  their  slaves  to  the  condition  of 
free  men.  Restoration  to  their  friends  and  country  is  now  out  of 
the  question ;  they  are  bound  to  protect  them  where  they  are,  and 
have  the  right  to  exact  their  obedience  to  good  laws  in  return  ;  but 
property  in  them  they  cannot  obtain,  their  natural  right  to  liberty 
is  untouched  and  inviolable.  The  manner  in  which  this  right  is  to 
be  restored,  we  grant,  is  in  the  power  of  such  governments  to 
determine,  provided  that  proceeding  be  regulated  by  the  principles 
above  laid  down, — First,  that  the  emancipation  be  sincerely  deter- 
mined upon,  at  some  time  future  :  Secondly,  that  it  be  not  delayed 
beyond  the  period  which  the  general  interest  of  the  slaves  themselves 
prescribes,  and  which  is  to  be  judged  of  benevolently,  and  without 
any  bias  of  judgment,  giving  the  advantage  of  every  doubt  to  the 
injured  party  :  Thirdly,  that  all  possible  means  be  adopted  to  ren- 
der freedom  a  good  to  them.  It  is  only  under  such  circumstances 
that  the  continuance  of  slavery  among  us  can  cease  to  be  a  national 
sin,  calling  down,  as  it  has  done,  and  must  do  until  a  process  of 
emancipation  be  honestly  commenced,  the  just  displeasure  of  God. 
What  compensations  may  be  justly  claimed  from  the  governments, 
fhat  is,  the  public  of  those  countries  who  have  entangled  themselves 
in  this  species  of  unjust  dealing,  by  those  who  have  purchased  men 
and  women  whom  no  one  had  the  right  to  sell,  and  no  one  had  the 
right  to  buy,  is  a  perfectly  distinct  question,  and  ought  not  to  turn 
repentance  and  justice  out  of  their  course,  or  delay  their  opera- 
tions for  a  moment.  Perhaps,  such  is  the  unfruitful  nature  of  all 
wrong,  that  it  may  be  found,  that,  as  free  labourers,  the  slaves 
would  be  of  equal  or  more  value  to  those  who  employ  them,  than 
at  present.  If  otherwise,  as  in  some  degree  "  all  have  sinned," 
the  real  loss  ought  to  be  borne  by  all,  when  that  loss  is  fairly  and 
impartially  ascertained ;  but  of  which  loss,  the  slave  interest,  if  we 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  275 

may  so  call  it,  ought  in  justice  to  bear  more  than  an  equal  share, 
as  having  had  the  greatest  gain.* 

The  rules  of  Christian  justice  thus  secure  the  three  great  natural 
rights  of  man ;  but  it  may  be  inquired  whether  he  has  himself  the 
power  of  surrendering  them  at  his  own  option  1 

And  First,  with  respect  to  Life. 

Since  government  is  an  institution  of  God,  it  seems  obligatory 
upon  all  men  to  live  in  a  social  state  ;  and,  if  so,  to  each  is  con- 
ceded  the  right  of  putting  his  life  to  hazard,  when  called  upon  by 
his  government  to  defend  that  state  from  domestic  rebellion  or 
foreign  war.  So  also  we  have  the  power  to  hazard  our  lives  to 
save  a  fellow  creature  from  perishing.  In  times  of  persecution  for 
religion,  we  are  enjoined  by  our  Lord  to  flee  from  one  city  to 
another ;  but  when  flight  is  cut  off,  we  have  the  power  to  surren- 
der life  rather  than  betray  our  allegiance  to  Christ.  According  to 
the  Apostle's  rule,  "  we  ought  to  lay  down  our  lives  for  the  bre- 
thren ;"  that  is,  for  the  Church  and  the  cause  of  religion.  In  this 
case,  and  in  some  others,  accompanied  with  danger  to  life,  when 
a  plain  rule  of  duty  is  seen  to  be  binding  upon  us,  we  are  not  only 
at  liberty  to  take  the  risk,  but  are  bound  to  do  it ;  since  it  is  more 
our  duty  to  obey  God  than  to  take  care  of  our  health  and  life. 
These  instances  of  devotion  have  been  by  some  writers  called 
■'suicides  of  duty,"  a  phrase  which  may  well  be  dispensed  with, 
although  the  sentiment  implied  in  it  is  correct. 

On  suicide,  properly  so  called,  that  is,  self  murder,  our  modem 
moralists  have  added  little  to  what  is  advanced  by  the  ethical  writers 
of  Greece  and  Rome,  to  prove  its  unlawfulness;  for,  though  suieide 
was  much  practised  in  those  ancient  states,  and  sometimes  com- 
mended, especially  by  the  Stoics,  it  was  occasionally  condemned. 
"  We  men,"  says  Plato,  "  are  all  by  the  appointment  of  God  in  a 
certain  prison  or  custody,  which  we  ought  not  to  break  out  of,  or 
run  away."  So  likewise  Cicero  :  "  God,  the  supreme  Governor  of 
all  things,  forbids  us  to  depart  hence  without  his  order.  All  pious 
men  ought  to  have  patience  to  continue  in  the  body,  as  long  as  God 
shall  please  who  sent  us  hither ;  and  not  force  themselves  out  of  the 
world  before  he  calls  for  them,  lest  they  be  found  deserters  of  the 
station  appointed  them  by  God." 

This  is  the  reasoning  which  has  generally  satisfied  our  moralists 
on  this  subject,  with  the  exception  of  some  infidel  sophists,  and  two 

*  The  above  paragraphs,  under  the  last  head,  were  obviously  written  with  a 
view  to  States  in  which  Christianity,  as  a  system,  is  formally  established  by  law-, 
and  in  which  the  acts  of  the  government  arc  officially  baSed  on  this  principle 
— American  Editor?. 


376  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

or  three  writers  of  paradoxes  in  the  Established  Church,  who  have 
defended  suicide,  or  affected  to  do  so.  Paley  has  added  some  other 
considerations,  drawn  from  his  doctrine  of  general  tendency,  and 
from  the  duties  which  are  deserted,  the  injuries  brought  upon 
others,  &c  ;  but  the  whole  only  shows,  that  merely  ethical  reason- 
ing  furnishes  but  a  feeble  barrier  against  this  offence  against  God. 
against  society,  and  against  ourselves,  independent  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  There  the  prohibitions  of  a  divine  law  lie  directly 
against  this  act,  and  also  the  whole  spirit  of  that  economy  under 
which  we  are  placed  by  Almighty  God. 

It  is  very  true,  that,  in  the  Old  Testament  history,  we  have  a 
few  instances  of  suicide  among  the  Jews,  which  were  not  marked 
by  any  penal  visitation,  as  among  modern  nations,  upon  the  remains 
of  the  deceased ;  such  as  the  denial  of  honourable  sepulture,  &c. 
But  this  arose  from  the  absence  of  all  penalty  in  such  cases  in  the 
Mosaic  law.  In  this  there  was  great  reason  ;  for  the  subject  him- 
self is  by  his  own  direful  act  put  beyond  the  reach  of  human 
visitation ;  and  every  dishonour  done  to  the  inanimate  corse  is 
only  punishment  inflicted  upon  the  innocent  survivors,  who,  in 
most  cases,  have  a  large  measure  of  suffering  already  entailed 
upon  them.  This  was  probably  the  humane  reason  for  the  silence 
of  the  Mosaic  law  as  to  the  punishment  of  suicide. 

But,  as  the  Law  of  the  two  Tables  is  of  general  moral  obligation, 
although  a  part  also  of  the  municipal  law  of  the  Jews  ;  as  it  con- 
cerned them  as  creatures,  as  well  as  subjects  of  the  theocracy ;  it 
takes  cognizance  of  acts  not  merely  as  prejudicial  to  society,  but 
as  offensive  to  God,  and  in  opposition  to  his  will  as  the  ruler  of  the 
world.  The  precept,  therefore,  "Thou  shalt  not  kill,"  must  be 
taken  to  forbid,  not  only  murder  properly  so  called,  which  is  a 
crime  against  society,  to  be  reached  by  human  penalties,  but  also 
self  destruction,  which,  though  a  crime  also  in  a  lower  degree 
against  society,  no  human  penalties  can  visit,  but  is  left,  since  the 
offender  is  out  of  the  reach  of  man,  wholly  to  the  retribution  of 
God.  The  absence  of  all  post  mortem  penalties  against  suicide  in 
the  Mosaic  law,  is  no  proof,  therefore,  that  it  is  not  included  in  the 
prohibition,  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill,"  any  more  than  the  absence  of 
all  penalties  in  the  same  law  against  a  covetous  disposition,  prove- 
any  thing  against  the  precept,  "  Thou  shalt  not  covet,"  being  inter- 
preted to  extend  to  the  heart  of  man,  although  violences,  frhefts. 
and  other  instances  of  covetousness,  in  action  only,  are  restrained 
in  the  Mosaic  law  by  positive  penalties.  Some  have  urged  it,  how- 
ever, as  a  great  absurdity,  to  allege  this  commandment  as  a  prohi- 
bition of  suicide.    "When  a  Christian  moralist,"  says  Dr.  Whately. 


UIIRD.j  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  27  "i 

"is  called  on  for  a  direct  scriptural  precept  against  suicide,  instead 
of  replying  that  the  Bible  is  not  meant  for  a  complete  code  of  lam; 
but  for  a  system  of  motives  and  principles,  the  answer  frequently 
given  is,  '  Thou  shalt  do  no  murder.'  Suicide,  if  any  one  consi- 
ders the  nature,  and  not  the  name  of  it,  (self  murder,)  evidently 
wants  the  essential  characteristic  of  murder,  viz.  the  hurt  and  injury 
done  to  one's  neighbour,  in  depriving  him  of  life,  as  well  as  to  others 
by  the  insecurity  they  are  in  consequence  liable  to  feel."  (5)  All  this 
might  be  correct  enough,  but  for  one  error  into  which  the  write1 
lias  fallen, — that  of  assuming  that  the  precept  is,  "  Thou  shalt  do 
no  murder ;"  for  if  that  were  the  term  used  in  the  strict  sense,  we 
need  not  be  told  that  suicide  is  not  murder,  which  is  only  saying, 
that  the  killing  one's  self  is  not  the  killing  another.  The  authorized 
translation  uses  the  word  "  kill,'"  "  thou  shalt  not  kill,"  as  better 
rendering  the  Hebrew  word,  which  has  a  similar  latitude  of  mean- 
ing, and  is  used  to  express  fortuitous  homicide,  and  the  act  of 
depriving  of  life  generally,  as  well  as  murder,  properly  so  called. 
That  the  prohibition  respects  the  killing  of  others  with  criminal 
intent,  all  agree,  and  Moses  describes  (3)  the  circumstances  which 
make  that  killing  so  criminal  as  to  be  punishable  with  death  ;  but 
that  he  included  the  different  kinds  of  homicide  within  the  prohibi- 
tion, is  equally  certain,  because  the  Mosaic  law  takes  cognizance 
of  homicide,  and  provides  for  the  due  examination  of  its  circum- 
stances by  the  Judges,  and  recognises  the  custom  of  the  Goel,  or 
avenging  of  blood,  and  provides  cities  of  refuge  for  the  homicide  : 
a  provision  which,  however  merciful,  left  the  incautious  manslayev 
subject  to  risks  and  inconveniences  which  had  the  nature  of  penal- 
ties. So  tender  was  this  law  of  the  life  of  man !  Moses,  however, 
as  a  legislator,  applying  this  great  moral  table  of  laws  to  practical 
legislation,  could  not  extend  the  penalties  under  this  prohibition 
farther  than  to  these  two  cases,  because  in  cases  of  suicide  the 
offender  is  out  cf  the  reach  of  human  power ;  but,  as  we  see  the 
precept  extended  beyond  the  case  of  murder  with  criminal  inten- 
tion, to  homicide,  and  that  the  word  used  in  the  prohibition,  "Thou 
shalt  not  kill"  is  so  indefinite  as  to  comprehend  every  act  by  which 
man  is  deprived  of  life,  when  it  has  no  authority  from  God ;  it  has 
been  very  properly  extended  by  Divines  and  scriptural  Moralists, 
not  only  to  homicide,  but  from  that  to  suicide.  This,  indeed, 
appears  to  be  its  import,  that  it  prohibits  the  taking  away  of  human 
life  in  all  cases,  without  authority  from  God,  which  authority  he 
has  lodged  with  human  governments,  the  "  powers  ordained  by 

(5)  Elements  of  Logic.  (6)  Numbers  i,  35. 

Vol.  III.  32 


278  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

him"  for  the  regulation  of  mankind,  in  what  relates  to  the  peace 
and  welfare  of  society ;  and,  whenever  the  life  of  man  is  taken 
away,  except  in  cases  sanctioned  by  human  governments,  proceed- 
ing upon  the  rules  and  principles  of  the  word  of  God,  then  the 
precept,  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill,"  is  directly  violated.  Dr.  Whately, 
in  the  passage  above  adverted  to,  objects  to  suicide  being  called 
self  murder,  because  this  criminal  act  has  not  the  qualities  of  that 
by  which  the  life  of  another  is  intentionally  and  maliciously  taken 
away ;  but  if  the  deliberate  and  intentional  deprivation  of  another 
of  life,  without  authority  from  the  divine  law,  and  from  human 
laws  established  upon  them,  be  that  which,  in  fact,  constitutes 
"murder,"  then  is  suicide  entitled  to  be  branded  with  the  same 
odious  appellation.  The  circumstances  must,  of  necessity,  differ ; 
but  the  act  itself  has  essentially  the  same  criminality,  though  not 
in  the  same  degree, — it  is  the  taking  away  of  the  life  of  a  human 
being,  without  the  authority  of  God,  the  maker  and  proprietor 
of  all,  and  therefore  in  opposition  to,  and  defiance  of,  his  authority. 
That  suicide  has  very  deservedly  received  the  morally  descriptive 
appellation  of  self  murder,  will  also  appear  from  the  reason  given, 
in  the  first  prohibition  against  murder,  for  making  this  species  of 
violence  a  capital  crime.  In  the  precepts  delivered  to  the  sons  of 
Noah,  and,  therefore,  through  them,  to  all  their  descendants,  that 
is,  to  all  mankind,  that  against  murder  is  thus  delivered,  (7)  "Whoso 
sheddeth  man's  blood,  by  man  shall  his  blood  be  shed,  for  in  the 
image  of  God  made  he  man"  There  is  in  this  reason  a  manifest 
reference  to  the  dignity  put  upon  human  nature,  by  its  being 
endowed  with  a  rational  and  immortal  spirit.  The  crime  of  mur- 
der is  made  to  lie,  therefore,  not  merely  in  the  putting  to  death 
the  animal  part  of  man's  nature,  for  this  is  merged  in  a  higher 
consideration,  which  seems  to  be,  the  indignity  done  to  the  noblest 
of  the  works  of  God ;  and  particularly,  the  value  of  life  to  an 
immortal  being,  accountable  in  another  state  for  the  actions  done 
in  this,  and  which  ought,  for  this  very  reason,  to  be  specially 
guarded,  since  death  introduces  him  into  changeless  and  eternal 
relations,  which  were  not  to  lie  at  the  mercy  of  human  passions. 
Such  moralists  as  the  writer  above  quoted,  would  restrain  the 
essential  characteristics  of  an  act  of  murder  to  the  "  hurt  done  to 
a  neighbour  in  depriving  him  of  life,"  and  the  "  insecurity"  inflicted 
upon  society ;  but  in  this  ancient  and  universal  lav/,  it  is  made 
eminently  to  consist  in  contempt  of  the  image  of  God  in  man,  and 
its  interference  with  man's  immortal  interests  and  relations  as  a 

(7)  Genesis  ix,  6. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  279 

deathless  spirit ;  and  if  so,  then  suicide  bears  upon  it  these  deep 
and  awful  characteristics  of  murder.  It  is  much  more  wisely  said 
by  Bishop  Kidder,  in  his  remarks  upon  this  passage,  that  the  reason 
given, — "  for  in  the  image  of  God  made  he  man," — is  a  farther 
aggravation  of  the  sin  of  murder.  It  is  a  great  trespass  upon  God. 
as  it  destroys  his  likeness ;  and  self  murder,  upon  this  account,  is 
forbidden  as  well  as  the  killing  of  others. 

Whatever  weight  may  be  due  to  the  considerations  urged  by 
the  moralists  above  quoted  against  this  crime, — and  every  motive 
which  may  deter  men  from  listening  to  the  first  temptation  to  so 
direful  an  act,  is  important, — yet  the  guards  of  Christianity  must 
be  acknowledged  to  be  of  a  more  powerful  kind.  For  the  prin- 
ciples of  our  religion  cannot  be  understood  without  our  perceiving, 
that,  of  almost  all  other  crimes,  wilful  suicide  ought  most  to  be 
dreaded.  It  is  a  sin  against  God's  authority.  He  is  "the  God  ol 
our  life  ;"  in  "  his  hand  our  breath  is  ;"  and  we  usurp  his  sovereignty 
when  we  presume  to  dispose  of  it.  As  resulting  from  the  pressure 
of  mortifications  of  spirit,  or  the  troubles  of  life,  it  becomes  a  sin, 
as  arraigning  his  providential  wisdom  and  goodness.  It  implies 
either  an  atheistic  denial  of  God's  government,  or  a  rebellious 
opposition  to  his  permissive  acts  or  direct  appointments ;  it  cannot 
be  committed,  therefore,  when  the  mind  is  sound,  but  in  the 
absence  of  all  the  Christian  virtues,  of  humility,  self  denial,  patience, 
and  the  fear  and  love  of  God,  and  only  under  the  influence  of 
pride,  worldliness,  forgetfulness  of  God,  and  contempt  of  him.  It 
hides  from  the  mind  the  realities  of  a  future  judgment,  or  it  defies 
them  ;  and  it  is  consummated  by  the  character  of '  wvpardonableness, 
because  it  places  the  criminal  at  once  beyond  the  reach  of  mercy. 

If  no  man  has  the  right,  then,  to  dispose  of  his  own  life  by 
suicide,  he  has  no  right  to  hazard  it  in  duels.  The  silence  of  the 
pulpits  in  those  quarters  where  only  the  warning  voice  of  the 
Christian  Preacher  can  be  heard  by  that  class  of  persons  most 
addicted  to  this  crime,  is  exceedingly  disgraceful ;  for  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that  the  palliating  views  of  this  practice  taken  by 
some  ethical  writers  of  celebrity,  together  with  the  loose  reasonings 
of  men  of  the  world,  have,  from  this  neglect,  exercised  much 
influence  upon  many  minds ;  and  the  consequence  has  been  that 
hundreds,  in  this  professedly  Christian  country,  have  fallen  victims 
to  false  notions  of  honour,  and  to  imperfect  notions  of  the  obliga- 
tions of  their  religion.  Paley  has  the  credit  of  dealing  with  this 
vice  with  greater  decision  than  many  of  our  moralists.  He  classes 
it  very  justly  with  murder.  "  Murder  is  forbidden  ;  and  wherever 
human  life  is  deliberately  taken  away,  otherwise  than  by  public 


280  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [FART 

authority,  there  is  murder." (8)  "  If  unauthorized  laws  of  honoui 
be  allowed  to  create  exceptions  to  divine  prohibitions,  there  is  an 
end  to  all  morality,  as  founded  in  the  will  of  the  Deity ;  and  the 
obligation  of  every  duty  may,  at  one  time  or  other,  be  discharged 
by  the  caprice  and  fluctuations  of  fashion."  (9)  The  fact  is,  that 
we  must  either  renounce  Christianity,  or  try  all  cases  by  its  rule. 
The  question  of  the '  lawfulness  of  duelling  is  thus  promptly  dis- 
posed of.  If  I  have  received  a  personal  injury,  I  am  bound  to 
forgive  it,  unless  it  be  of  such  a  nature  that  it  becomes  a  duty  to 
punish  it  by  due  course  of  law ;  but  even  then  not  in  the  spirit  ol 
revenge,  but  out  of  respect  to  the  peace  and  welfare  of  society. 
If  I  have  given  offence,  I  am  bound  to  acknowledge  it,  and  to 
make  reparation ;  and  if  my  adversary  will  not  be  satisfied,  and 
insists  upon  my  staking  my  life  against  his  own,  no  considerations 
of  reputation  or  disgrace,  the  good  or  ill  opinion  of  men,  who  form 
their  judgments  in  utter  disregard  to  the  laws  of  God,  can  have 
any  more  weight  in  this,  than  in  any  other  case  of  immorality. 
The  sin  of  duelling  unites,  in  fact,  the  two  crimes  of  suicide  and  oi 
murder.  He  who  falls  in  a  duel  is  guilty  of  suicide,  by  voluntarily 
exposing  himself  to  be  slain ;  he  by  whom  he  falls  is  guilty  of 
murder,  as  having  shed  man's  blood  without  authority.  Nay,  the 
guilt  of  the  two  crimes  unites  in  the  same  person.  He  who  falls  is 
a  suicide  in  fact,  and  the  murderer  of  another  in  intention  ;  he  b\ 
whom  he  falls  is  a  murderer  in  fact,  and  so  far  a  suicide  as  to  have 
put  his  own  life  into  imminent  peril,  in  contempt  of  God's  authority 
over  him.  He  has  contemned  the  "  image  of  God  in  man,"  both 
in  himself  and  in  his  brother.  And  where  duels  are  not  fatal  on 
either  side,  the  whole  guilt  is  chargeable  upon  the  parties,  as  a  sin 
purposed  in  the  heart,  although,  in  that  case,  there  is  space  left 
for  repentance. 

Life,  then,  is  not  disposable  at  the  option  of  man,  nor  is  Pro- 
perty itself,  without  respect  to  the  rules  of  the  divine  law  ;  and 
here,  too,  we  shall  perceive  the  feebleness  of  the  considerations 
urged,  in  merely  moral  systems,  to  restrain  prodigal  and  wasteful 
expenditure,  hazardous  speculations,  and  even  the  obvious  evil  of 
gambling.  Many  weighty  arguments,  we  grant,  may  be  drawn 
against  all  these  from  the  claims  of  children,  and  near  relations, 
whose  interests  we  are  bound  to  regard,  and  whom  we  can  have 
no  right  to  expose  even  to  the  chance  of  being  involved  in  the 
same  ruin  with  ourselves.  But  these  reasons  can  have  little  sway 
with  those  who  fancy  that  they  can  keep  within  the  verge  of 

(8)  Moral  and  Political  Philosophy.  (9)  Ibid. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  281 

extreme  danger,  and  who  will  plead  their  "natural  right"  to  do 
what  they  will  with  their  own.  In  cases,  too,  where  there  may  be 
no  children  or  dependent  relatives,  the  individual  would  feel  less 
disposed  to  acknowledge  the  force  of  this  class  of  reasons,  or  think 
them  quite  inapplicable  to  his  case.  But  Christianity  enjoins 
"  moderation"  of  the  desires,  and  temperance  in  the  gratification 
of  the  appetites,  and  in  the  show  and  splendour  of  life,  even  where 
a  state  of  opulence  can  command  them.  It  has  its  admonitions 
against  the  "  love  of  money  ;"  against  "  willing  to  be  rich,"  excepi 
as  "the  Lord  may  prosper  a  man"  in  the  usual  track  and  course 
of  honest  industry, — authoritative  cautions  which  lie  directly  against 
hazardous  speculations  ;  and  it  warns  such  as  despise  them  of  the 
consequent  "  temptations"  and  spiritual  "  snares,"  destructive  to 
habits  of  piety,  and  ultimately  to  the  soul,  into  which  they  must 
fall, — considerations  of  vast  moment,  but  peculiar  to  itself,  and 
quite  out  of  the  range  of  those  moral  systems  which  have  no 
respect  to  its  authority.  Against  gambling,  in  its  most  innocent 
forms,  it  sets  its  injunction,  "  Redeeming  the  time ;"  and  in  its 
more  aggravated  cases,  it  opposes  to  it  not  only  the  above  con- 
siderations, as  it  springs  from  an  unhallowed  "  love  of  money  f 
but  the  whole  of  that  spirit  and  temper  which  it  makes  to  be 
obligatory  upon  us,  and  which  those  evil  and  often  diabolical 
excitements,  produced  by  this  habit,  so  fearfully  violate.  Above 
all,  it  makes  property  a  trust,  to  be  employed  under  the  rules  pre- 
scribed by  Him  who,  as  Sovereign  Proprietor,  has  deposited  it  with 
us,  which  rules  require  its  use  certainly ;  (for  the  covetous  are 
excluded  from  the  kingdom  of  God  ;)  but  its  use,  first,  for  the  sup- 
ply of  our  wants,  according  to  our  station,  with  moderation  ;  then, 
as  a  provision  for  children,  and  dependent  relatives ;  finally,  for 
purposes  of  charity  and  religion,  in  which  "grace,"  as  before 
slated,  it  requires  us  "  to  abound  ;" — and  it  enforces  all  these  by 
placing  us  under  the  responsibility  of  accounting  to  God  himself, 
in  person,  for  the  abuse  or  neglect  of  this  trust,  at  the  General 
Judgment. 

With  respect  to  the  Third  natural  right,  that  of  Liberty,  it  is 
a  question  which  can  seldom  or  never  occur  in  the  present  state 
of  society,  whether  a  man  is  free  to  part  with  it  for  a  valuable 
consideration.  Under  the  law  of  Moses,  this  was  certainly  allowed ; 
but  a  Christian  man  stands  on  different  ground.  To  a  Pagan  he 
would  not  be  at  liberty  to  enslave  himself,  because  he  is  not  at 
liberty  to  put  to  hazard  his  soul's  interests,  which  might  be  inter- 
fered with  by  the  control  given  to  a  Pagan  over  his  time  and 
conduct.     To  a  Christian  he  could  not  be  at  liberty  to  alienate 

32* 


282  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES-  [PART 

himself,  because,  the  spirit  of  Christianity  being  opposed  to  slavery, 
the  one  is  not  at  liberty  to  buy,  nor  the  other  to  sell,  for  reasons 
before  given.  I  conclude,  therefore,  that  no  man  can  lawfully 
divest  himself  absolutely  of  his  personal  liberty,  for  any  consider- 
ation whatever. 

To  the  natural  rights  of  life,  property,  and  liberty,  may  be  added 
the  right  of  Conscience. 

By  this  is  meant  the  right  which  a  man  has  to  profess  his  own 
opinions  on  subjects  of  religion,  and  to  worship  God  in  the  mode 
which  he  deems  most  acceptable  to  him.  Whether  this,  however, 
be  strictly  a  natural  right,  like  the  three  above  mentioned,  may 
be  a  subject  of  dispute,  for  then  it  would  be  universal,  which  is, 
perhaps,  carrying  the  point  too  far.  The  matter  may  best  be 
determined  by  considering  the  ground  of  that  right,  which  differs 
much  from  the  others  we  have  mentioned.  The  right  to  life 
results  both  from  the  appointment  of  God,  and  the  absence  of  a 
superior  or  countervailing  right  in  another  to  deprive  us  of  it,  until, 
at  least,  we  forfeit  that  right  to  some  third  party,  by  some  voluntary 
act  of  our  own.  This  also  applies  to  the  rights  of  property  and 
liberty.  The  right  of  professing  particular  religious  opinions,  and 
practising  a  particular  mode  of  worship,  can  only  rest  upon  a  con- 
viction that  these  are  duties  enjoined  upon  us  by  God.  For  since 
religion  is  a  matter  which  concerns  man  and  God,  a  man  musi 
know  that  it  is  obligatory  upon  him  as  a  duty,  and  under  fear  ol 
God's  displeasure,  to  profess  his  opinions  openly,  and  to  practise 
some  particular  mode  of  worship. 

To  apply  this  to  the  case  of  persons  all  sincerely  receiving  the 
Bible  as  a  revelation  from  God.  Unquestionably  it  is  a  part  of 
that  revelation,  that  those  who  receive  its  doctrines  should  profess 
and  attempt  to  propagate  them  ;  nor  can  they  profess  them  in  am 
other  way  than  they  interpret  the  meaning  of  the  book  which  con- 
tains them.  Equally  clear  is  it,  that  the  worship  of  God  is  enjoined 
upon  man,  and  that  publicly,  and  in  collective  bodies.  From  these 
circumstances,  therefore,  it  results,  that  it  is  a  duly  which  man 
owes  to  God  to  profess  and  to  endeavour  to  propagate  his  honest 
views  of  the  meaning  of  the  Scriptures,  and  to  worship  God  in  the 
mode  which  he  sincerely  conceives  is  made  obligatory  upon  him, 
by  the  same  sacred  volume.  It  is  from  this  duty  that  the  right  oi 
conscience  flows,  and  from  this  alone  ;  and  it  thus  becomes  a  right 
of  that  nature  which  no  earthly  power  has  any  authority  to  obstruct, 
because  it  can  have  no  power  to  alter  or  to  destroy  the  obligations 
which  Almighty  God,  the  Supreme  Governor,  has  laid  upon  his. 
creatures. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTE?.  283 

It  does  not,  however,  follow  from  this  statement,  that  human 
governments,  professing  to  be  regulated  themselves  by  the  princi- 
ples of  Christianity,  have  no  authority  to  take  cognizance  of  the 
manner  in  which  this  right  of  conscience  is  exercised.  They  arc 
"  ordained  of  God"  to  uphold  their  subjects  in  the  exercise  of  their 
just  rights  respectively,  and  that  without  partiality.  If,  therefore, 
under  a  plea  of  conscience,  one  sect  should  interfere  to  obstruct 
others  in  a  peaceable  profession  of  their  opinions,  and  a  peaceable 
exercise  of  their  worship ;  or  should  exercise  its  own  so  as  to  be 
vexatiously  intrusive  upon  others,  and  in  defiance  of  some  rival 
sect ;  as  for  instance,  in  a  Protestant  country,  if  Roman  Catholics 
were  to  carry  the  objects  of  their  idolatry  about  the  streets,  instead 
of  contenting  themselves  with  worshipping  in  their  own  way,  in 
their  own  chapels.  In  all  such  cases  the  government  might  be 
bound,  in  respect  of  the  rights  of  other  classes  of  its  subjects,  to 
interfere  by  restraint,  nor  would  it  then  trespass  upon  the  rights  of 
conscience,  justly  interpreted.  Again,  since  "  the  powers  that  be 
are  ordained  of  God,"  for  "  a  terror  to  evil  doers,  and  a  praise  to 
them  that  do  well ;"  which  evil  doing  and  well  doing  are  to  be 
interpreted  according  to  the  common  sense  and  agreement  ot 
mankind,  and  plainly  refer  to  moral  actions  only ;  should  any  seel 
or  individual,  ignorantly,  fanatically,  or  corruptly,  so  interpret  the 
Scriptures  as  to  suppose  themselves  free  from  moral  obligation, 
and  then  proceed  to  practise  their  tenets  by  any  such  acts  as  vio- 
late the  laws  of  well-ordered  society,  or  by  admitting  indecencies 
into  their  modes  of  worship,  as  some  fanatics  in  former  times  who 
used  to  strip  themselves  naked  in  their  assemblies ;  here  too  a 
government  would  have  the  right  to  disregard  the  plea  of  con- 
science if  set  up,  and  to  restrain  such  acts,  and  the  teachers  oi 
them,  as  pernicious  to  society.  But  if  the  opinions  professed  b} 
any  sect,  however  erroneous  they  may  be,  and  however  zealousl) 
a  sound  and  faithful  Christian  might  be  called  by  a  sense  of  duty 
to  denounce  them  as  involving  a  corrupt  conscience,  or  no  con- 
science at  all,  and  as  dangerous  or  fatal  to  the  salvation  of  those 
that  hold  them,  do  not  interfere  with  the  peace,  the  morals,  and 
good  order  of  society ;  it  is  not  within  the  province  of  a  govern- 
ment to  animadvert  upon  them  by  force  of  law ;  since  it  was  not 
established  to  judge  of  men's  sincerity  in  religion,  nor  of  the 
tendency  of  opinions  as  they  affect  their  salvation,  but  only  to 
uphold  the  morals  and  good  order  of  the  community.  So,  like- 
wise, what  has  been  called  by  some  worship,  has  been  sometimes 
marked  with  great  excesses  of  enthusiasm,  and  with  even  ridiculous 
follies ;  but  if  the  peace  of  others,  and  the  morals  of  society,  are 


384  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

not  thereby  endangered,  it  is  not  the  part  of  the  magistracy  to 
interfere,  at  least  by  authority. 

In  cases,  however,  where  political  opinions  are  connected  with 
religious  notions,  and  the  plea  of  conscience  is  set  up  as  an 
'•'unalienable  right,"  to  sanction  their  propagation,  a  government 
may  be  justified  in  interposing,  not  indeed  on  the  ground  that  it 
judges  the  conscience  to  be  erring  and  corrupt,  but  for  its  own 
just  support  when  endangered  by  such  opinions.  Sects  of  religious 
republicans  have  sometimes  appeared  under  a  monarchical  govern- 
ment,— the  Fifth  Monarchy  Fanatics,  for  instance,  who,  according 
to  their  interpretation  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  regarded  the 
existence  of  all  earthly  monarchies  as  inimical  to  it,  and,  believing 
that  the  period  of  its  establishment  was  come,  thought  it  impiety 
to  acknowledge  any  earthly  sovereign,  as  being  contrary  to  their 
allegiance  to  Christ.  When  such  notions  are  confined  to  a  few 
persons,  it  is  wise  in  a  government  to  leave  them  to  their  own 
absurdities  as  their  most  potent  cure ;  but  should  a  fanaticism  of 
this  kind  seize  upon  a  multitude,  and  render  them  restless  and 
seditious,  the  State  would  be  justifiable  in  restraining  them  by 
force,  although  a  mistaken  conscience  might  be  mixed  up  with  the 
error.  We  may  therefore  conclude,  that  as  to  religious  sects,  the 
plea  of  conscience  does  not  take  their  conduct  out  of  the  cogni- 
zance of  the  civil  magistrate  when  the  peace,  the  morality,  and 
safety  of  society  are  infringed  upon ;  but  that  otherwise,  the  rights 
of  conscience  are  inviolable,  even  when  it  is  obviously  erroneous, 
and,  religiously  considered,  as  to  the  individual  dangerous.  The 
case  then  is  one  which  is  to  be  dealt  with  by  instruction,  and  moral 
suasion.  It  belongs  to  public  instructers,  and  to  all  well-informed 
persons,  to  correct  an  ignorant  and  perverse  conscience,  by 
friendly  and  compassionate  admonition ;  and  the  power  of  the 
magistrate  is  only  lawfully  interposed,  when  the  effect  complained 
of  so  falls  upon  society  as  to  infringe  upon  the  rights  of  others,  or 
upon  the  public  morals  and  peace  ; — but  even  then  the  facts  ought 
to  be  obvious,  and  not  constructive. 

The  case  of  those  who  reject  the  revelation  of  the  Scripture? 
must  be  considered  on  its  own  merits. 

Simple  Deism,  in  a  Christian  country,  may  lay  a  foundation  for 
such  a  plea  of  conscience  as  the  State  ought  to  admit,  although  it 
should  be  rejected  by  a  sound  theologian.  The  Deist  derives  his 
religion  by  inference  from  what  he  supposes  discoverable  of  the 
attributes  and  will  of  God  from  nature,  and  the  course  of  the 
Divine  Government.  Should  he  conclude  that  among  such  indi- 
cations of  the  will  of  God  there  are  those  which  make  it  bis  duty 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  285 

to  profess  his  opinions,  to  attack  the  evidences  of  our  Divine 
Revelation  as  of  insufficient  proof,  and  to  worship  God  in  a 
manner  more  agreeable  to  his  system,  it  would  be  too  delicate  an 
interference  of  a  government  with  a  question  of  conscience,  to  be 
allowed  to  make  itself  the  judge  whether  any  such  conviction 
could  be  conscientiously  entertained ;  although  by  Divines,  in 
their  character  of  public  instructers,  this  would  properly  be  denied. 
Absolutely  to  shut  out,  by  penal  laws,  all  discussion  on  the 
evidences  of  Divine  Revelation,  would  probably  make  secret 
infidels  in  such  numbers  as  would  more  than  counterbalance  the 
advantage  which  would  be  gained,  and  that  by  the  suspicion  which 
it  would  excite.  But  this  principle  would  not  extend  to  the  pro- 
tection of  any  doctrine  directly  subversive  of  justice,  chastity,  or 
humanity ;  for  then  society  would  be  attacked,  and  the  natural  as 
well  as  civil  rights  of  man  invaded.  Nor  can  opprobrious  and 
blasphemous  attacks  upon  Christianity  be  covered  by  a  plea  of 
conscience  and  right,  since  these  are  not  necessary  to  argument. 
It  is  evident  that  conscience,  in  the  most  liberal  construction  of  the 
term,  cannot  be  pleaded  in  their  behalf;  and  they  are  not  innocent 
even  as  to  society. 

To  those  systems  which  deny  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  and* 
consequently,  a  state  of  future  retribution,  and  which  assume  any 
of  the  forms  of  Atheism,  no  toleration  can,  consistently  with  duty, 
be  extended  by  a  Christian  government.  The  reasons  of  this  excep- 
tion are,  1.  That  the  very  basis  of  its  jurisprudence,  which  is  founded 
upon  a  belief  in  God,  the  sanctity  of  oaths,  and  a  future  state,  is 
assaulted  by  such  doctrines,  and  that  it  cannot  co-exist  with  them  : 

2.  That  they  are  subversive  of  the  morals  of  the  people  :  and 

3.  That  no  conscience  can  be  pleaded  by  their  votaries  for  the 
avowal  of  such  tenets.  When  the  existence  of  a  God  and  his 
moral  government  are  denied,  no  conscience  can  exist,  to  require 
the  publication  of  such  tenets ;  for  this  cannot  be  a  duty  imposed 
upon  them  by  God.  since  they  deny  his  existence.  No  right  of 
conscience  is  therefore  violated  when  they  are  restrained  by  civil 
penalties.  Such  persons  cannot  have  the  advantages  of  society, 
without  submitting  to  the  principles  on  which  it  is  founded ;  and 
as  they  profess  to  believe  that  they  are  not  accountable  beings, 
their  silence  cannot  be  a  guilt  to  them  ;  they  give  up  the  argument 
drawn  from  conscience,  and  from  its  rights,  which  have  no  exist- 
ence at  all  but  as  founded  upon  revealed  dutv. 

The  second  branch  of  Justice  we  have  denominated  Economi- 
cal :  it  respects  those  relations  which  grow  out  of  the  existence  o! 
men  in  families. 


28t)  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

The  first  is  that  of  Husband  and  Wife,  and  arises  out  of  the 
institution  of  Marriage. 

The  foundation  of  the  marriage  union  is  the  will  of  God  that  the 
human  race  should  "  increase  and  multiply,"  but  only  through  a 
chaste  and  restricted  conjunction  of  one  man  and  one  woman, 
united  by  their  free  vows  in  a  bond  made  by  the  Divine  law  indis- 
soluble, except  by  death  or  by  adultery.  The  will  of  God  as  to 
marriage  is,  however,  general,  and  is  not  so  expressed  as  to  lay  an 
imperative  obligation  to  marry  upon  every  one,  in  all  circumstances. 
There  was  no  need  of  the  law  being  directed  to  each  individual  as 
such,  since  the  instincts  of  nature,  and  the  affection  of  love  planted 
in  human  beings,  were  sufficient  to  guarantee  its  general  observance. 
The  very  bond  of  marriage  too  being  the  preference  founded  upon 
love,  rendered  the  act  one  in  which  choice  and  feeling  were  to  have 
great  influence  ;  nor  could  a  prudent  regard  to  circumstances  be 
excluded.  Cases  were  possible  in  which  such  a  preference  as  is 
essential  to  the  felicity  and  advantages  of  that  state  might  not  be 
excited,  nor  the  due  degree  of  affection  to  warrant  the  union  called 
forth.  There  might  be  cases  in  which  circumstances  might  be  ini- 
mical to  the  full  discharge  of  some  of  the  duties  of  that  state  ;  as 
the  comfortable  maintenance  of  a  wife,  and  a  proper  provision  for 
children.  Some  individuals  would  also  be  called  by  providence  to 
duties  in  the  church  and  in  the  world,  which  might  better  be  per- 
formed in  a  single  and  unfettered  life  ;  and  seasons  of  persecution, 
as  we  are  taught  by  St.  Paul,  have  rendered  it  an  act  of  Christian 
prudence  to  abstain  even  from  this  honourable  estate.  The  general 
rule,  however,  is  in  favour  of  marriage  ;  and  all  exceptions  seem  to 
require  justification  on  some  principle  grounded  upon  an  equal  or 
a  paramount  obligation. 

One  intention  of  marriage  in  its  original  institution  was,  the  pro- 
duction of  the  greatest  number  of  healthy  children ;  and  that  it 
secures  this  object,  is  proved  from  the  universal  fact,  that  popu- 
lation increases  more,  and  is  of  better  quality,  where  marriage 
is  established  and  its  sacred  laws  are  observed,  than  where  the 
intercourse  of  the  sexes  is  promiscuous.  A  second  end  was  the 
establishment  of  the  interesting  and  influential  relations  of  acknow- 
ledged children  and  parents,  from  which  the  most  endearing, 
meliorating,  and  pure  affections  result,  and  which  could  not  exist 
without  marriage.  It  is  indeed  scarcely  possible  even  to  sketch 
the  numerous  and  important  effects  of  this  sacred  institution, 
which  at  once  displays,  in  the  most  affecting  manner,  the  Divine 
benevolence  and  the  Divine  wisdom.  It  secures  the  preservation 
and  tender  nurture  of  children,  by  concentrating  an  affection  upoa 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  -JS7 

them,  whicli  is  dissipated  and  lost  wherever  fornication  prevails 
It  creates  conjugal  tenderness,  filial  piety,  the  attachment  of  bro 
thers  and  sisters,  and  of  collateral  relations.  It  softens  the  feelings, 
and  increases  the  benevolence  of  society  at  large,  by  bringing  all 
these  affections  to  operate  powerfully  within  each  of  those  domestic 
and  family  circles  of  which  society  is  composed.  It  excites  industry 
and  economy;  and  secures  the  communication  of  moral  knowledge, 
and  the  inculcation  of  civility,  and  early  habits  of  submission  to 
authority,  by  which  men  are  fitted  to  become  the  subjects  of  a 
public  government,  and  without  which,  perhaps,  no  government 
could  be  sustained  but  by  brute  force,  or,  it  may  be,  not  sustained 
at  all.  These  are  some  of  the  innumerable  benefits  by  which  mar- 
riage promotes  human  happiness,  and  the  peace  and  strength  of 
the  community  at  large. 

The  institution  of  marriage  not  only  excludes  the  promiscuous 
intercourse  of  the  sexes,  but  polygamy  also ;  a  practice  almost 
equally  fatal  to  the  kind  affections,  to  education,  to  morals,  and  to 
purity.  The  argument  of  our  Lord  with  the  Pharisees,  on  tin 
subject  of  divorce,  Matt,  xix,  assumes  it  as  even  acknowledged  bv 
the  Jews,  that  marriage  was  not  only  of  Divine  institution,  but  thai 
it  consisted  in  the  union  of  two  only, — "  they  twain  shall  be  one 
flesh."  This  was  the  law  of  marriage  given  at  first,  not  to  Adam 
and  Eve  only,  but  prospectively  to  all  their  descendants.  The  first 
instance  of  polygamy  was  that  of  Lamech,  and  this  has  no  sanction 
from  the  Scripture  ;  which  may  be  observed  of  other  instances  in 
the  Old  Testament.  They  were  opposed  to  the  original  law,  and 
in  all  cases  appear  to  have  been  punished  with  many  afflictive 
visitations.  The  Mosaic  law,  although  polygamy  appears  to  have 
been  practised  under  it,  gives  no  direct  countenance  to  the  prac- 
tice ;  which  intimates  that,  as  in  the  case  of  divorce,  the  connivance 
was  not  intended  to  displace  the  original  institution.  Hence,  in  the 
language  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as  of  the  New,  the  terms 
husband  and  wife  in  the  singular  number  continually  occur ;  and 
a  passage  in  the  prophet  Malachi  is  so  remarkable,  as  to  warrant 
the  conclusion,  that  among  the  pious  Jews,  the  original  law  was 
never  wholly  out  of  sight.  "Yet  ye  say,  Wherefore  1  Because  the 
Lord  hath  been  witness  between  thee,  and  the  wife  of  thy  youth. 
against  whom  thou  hast  dealt  treacherously,  yet  she  is  thy  compa- 
nion, and  the  wife  of  thy  covenant.  And  did  not  he  make  one,  /" 
— (one  woman) — "  Yet  had  he  the  residue  of  the  spirit  V' — (and 
therefore  could  have  made  more  than  one) — "And  wherefore 
one1?"  "That  he  might  seek  a  godly  seed,"  is  the  answer,  whicli 
strongly  shows  how  closely  connected  in  the  prophet's  mind  wer* 


288  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

the  circumstances  of  piety  in  the  offspring  and  the  restraint  of 
marriage  to  one  wife  only ;  for  he  thus  glances  at  one  of  the  obvious 
evils  of  polygamy,  its  deteriorating  moral  influence  upon  children. 
If,  however,  in  some  instances  the  practice  of  the  Jews  fell  short 
of  the  strictness  of  the  original  law  of  marriage,  that  law  is  now 
fully  restored  by  Christ.  In  a  discourse  with  the  Pharisees,  he 
not  only  re-enacts  that  law,  but  guards  against  its  evasion  by  the 
practice  of  divorce  ;  and  asserts  the  marriage  union  to  be  indisso- 
luble by  any  thing  but  adultery.  The  argument  of  our  Lord  in 
this  discourse  is,  indeed,  equally  conclusive  against  polygamy  and 
against  the  practice  of  divorce;  for  "if,"  says  Dr.  Paley,  "whoever 
putteth  away  his  wife  and  marrieth  another  committeth  adultery, 
he  who  marrieth  another,  the  first  wife  being  living,  is  no  less 
guilty  of  adultery ;  because  the  adultery  does  not  consist  in  the 
repudiation  of  the  first  wife ;  for,  however  cruel  and  unjust  that 
may  be,  it  is  not  adultery  ;  but  in  entering  into  a  second  marriage, 
during  the  legal  existence  and  obligation  of  the  first." 

Nature  itself  comes  in  also  as  a  confirmation  of  this  original  law. 
In  births,  there  is  a  small  surplusage  of  males  over  females;  which, 
being  reduced  by  the  more  precarious  life  of  males,  and  by  the  acci- 
dents to  which  more  than  females  they  are  exposed  from  wars  and 
dangerous  employments,  brings  the  number  of  males  and  females 
to  a  par,  and  shows  that  in  the  order  of  providence  a  man  ought 
to  have  but  one  wife ;  and  that  where  polygamy  is  not  allowed, 
every  woman  may  have  a  husband.  This  equality,  too,  is  found  in 
all  countries  ;  although  some  licentious  writers  have  attempted  to 
deny  it  upon  unsound  evidence. 

Another  end  of  marriage  was,  the  prevention  of  fornication ; 
and  as  this  is  done,  not  only  by  providing  for  a  lawful  gratification 
of  the  sexual  appetite  ;  but  more  especially  by  that  mutual  affec- 
tion upon  which  marriages,  when  contracted  according  to  the  will 
of  God,  are  founded,  this  conjunction  necessarily  requires  that 
degree  of  love  between  the  contracting  parties  which  produces  n 
preference  of  each  other  above  every  man  or  woman  in  the  world. 
Wherever  this  degree  of  affection  does  not  exist,  it  may  therefore 
be  concluded  that  the  rite  of  marriage  is  profaned,  and  the  great- 
est security  for  the  accomplishment  of  its  moral  ends  weakened 
or  destroyed.  Interest,  compliance  with  the  views  of  family 
connexions,  caprice,  or  corporal  attractions,  it  may  be  therefore 
concluded,  are  not  in  themselves  lawful  grounds  of  marriage,  as 
tending,  without  affection,  to  frustrate  the  intention  of  God  in  its 
institution  ;  to  which  end  all  are  bound  to  subject  themselves.  On 
the  other  hand,  since  love  is  often  a  delusive  and  sickly  affection. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  289 

exceedingly  temporary  and  uncertain,  when  it  is  unconnected  with 
judgment  and  prudence ;  and  also  because  marriages  are  for  the 
most  part  contracted  by  the  young  and  inexperienced,  whose  pas- 
sions are  then  strongest  when  their  judgments  are  most  immature  ; 
in  no  step  in  life  is  the  counsel  of  others  more  necessary,  and  in 
no  case  ought  it  to  be  sought  with  greater  docility  than  in  this.  A 
proper  respect  to  the  circumstances  of  age,  fitness,  &c,  ought  never 
to  be  superseded  by  the  plea  of  mere  affection ;  although  no  cir- 
cumstances can  justify  marriage  without  that  degree  of  affection 
which  produces  an  absolute  preference. 

Whether  marriage  be  a  civil  or  a  religious  contract  has  been  a 
subject  of  dispute.  The  truth  seems  to  be  that  it  is  both.  It  has 
its  engagements  to  men,  and  its  vows  to  God.  A  Christian  State 
recognises  marriage  as  a  branch  of  public  morality,  and  a  source 
of  civil  peace  and  strength.  It  is  connected  with  the  peace  of 
society  by  assigning  one  woman  to  one  man,  and  the  State  pro- 
tects him,  therefore,  in  her  exclusive  possession.  Christianity,  by 
allowing  divorce  in  the  event  of  adultery,  supposes,  also,  that  the 
crime  must  be  proved  by  proper  evidence  before  the  civil  magis- 
trate ;  and  lest  divorce  should  be  the  result  of  unfounded  suspicion, 
or  be  made  a  cover  for  license,  the  decision  of  the  case  could  safely 
lie  lodged  nowhere  else.  Marriage,  too,  as  placing  one  human  being- 
more  completely  under  the  power  of  another  than  any  other  rela- 
tion, requires  laws  for  the  protection  of  those  who  are  thus  so 
exposed  to  injury.  The  distribution  of  society  into  families,  also, 
can  only  be  an  instrument  for  promoting  the  order  of  the  commu- 
nity, by  the  cognizance  which  the  law  takes  of  the  head  of  a  family, 
and  by  making  him  responsible,  to  a  certain  extent,  for  the  conduct 
of  those  under  his  influence.  Questions  of  property  are  also  involved 
in  marriage  and  its  issue.  The  law  must,  therefore,  for  these  and 
many  other  weighty  reasons,  be  cognizant  of  marriage  ;  must  pre- 
scribe various  regulations  respecting  it ;  require  publicity  of  the 
contract ;  and  guard  some  of  the  great  injunctions  of  religion 
in  the  matter  by  penalties.  In  no  well  ordered  state  can  mar- 
riage, therefore,  be  so  exclusively  left  to  religion  as  to  shut  out 
The  cognizance  and  control  of  the  State.  But  then  those  who 
would  have  the  whole  matter  to  lie  between  the  parties  themselves, 
and  the  civil  magistrate,  appear  wholly  to  forget  that  marriage  is  a 
solemn  religious  act,  in  which  vows  are  made  to  God  by  both  per- 
sons, who,  when  the  rite  is  properly  understood,  engage  to  abide 
by  all  those  laws  with  which  he  has  guarded  the  institution ;  to 
love  and  cherish  each  other ;  and  to  remain  faithful  to  each  other 
until  death.    For  if,  at  least,  they  profess  belief  in  Christianity, 

Vol.  III.  33 


290  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

whatever  duties  are  laid  upon  husbands  and  wives  in  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, they  engage  to  obey,  by  the  very  act  of  their  contracting 
marriage.  The  question,  then,  is  whether  such  vows  to  God  as 
are  necessarily  involved  in  marriage,  are  to  be  left  between  the 
parties  and  God  privately,  or  whether  they  ought  to  be  publicly 
made  before  his  Ministers  and  the  Church.  On  this  the  Scriptures 
are  silent;  but  though  Michaelis  has  showed  (1)  that  the  Priests 
under  the  law  were  not  appointed  to  celebrate  marriage ;  yet  in 
the  practice  of  the  modern  Jews,  it  is  a  religious  ceremony,  the 
chief  Rabbi  of  the  synagogue  being  present,  and  prayers  being 
appointed  for  the  occasion.  (2)  This  renders  it  probable  that  the 
character  of  the  ceremony  under  the  law,  from  the  most  ancient 
times,  was  a  religious  one.  The  more  direct  connexion  of  marriage 
with  religion  in  Christian  States,  by  assigning  its  celebration  to  the 
Ministers  of  religion,  appears  to  be  a  very  beneficial  custom,  and 
one  which  the  State  has  a  right  to  enjoin.  For  since  the  welfare 
and  morals  of  society  are  so  much  interested  in  the  performance  of 
the  mutual  duties  of  the  married  state  ;  and  since  those  duties  have 
a  religious  as  well  as  a  civil  character,  it  is  most  proper  that  some 
provision  should  be  made  for  explaining  those  duties  ;  and  for  this 
a  standing  form  of  marriage  is  best  adapted.  By  acts  of  religion, 
also,  they  are  more  solemnly  impressed  upon  the  parties.  When 
this  is  prescribed  in  any  State,  it  becomes  a  Christian  cheerfully, 
and  even  thankfully,  to  comply  with  a  custom  of  so  important  a 
tendency,  as  matter  of  conscientious  subjection  to  lawful  authority, 
although  no  scriptural  precept  can  be  pleaded  for  it.  That  the 
ceremony  should  be  confined  to  the  Clergy  of  an  Established 
Church  is  a  different  consideratiDn.  We  are  inclined  to  think  that 
the  religious  effect  would  be  greater,  were  the  Ministers  of  each 
religious  body  to  be  authorized  by  the  State  to  celebrate  marriages 
among  their  own  people,  due  provision  being  made  for  the  regular 
and  secure  registry  of  them,  and  to  prevent  the  civil  laws  respect- 
ing marriage  from  being  evaded. 

When  this  important  contract  is  once  made,  then  certain  rights 
are  acquired  by  the  parties  mutually,  who  are  also  bound  by  reci- 
procal duties,  in  the  fulfilment  of  which  the  practical  "  righteous- 
ness" of  each  consists.  Here,  also,  the  superior  character  of  the 
morals  of  the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  their  higher  authority,  is 
illustrated.  It  may,  indeed,  be  within  the  scope  of  mere  moralists 
to  show  that  fidelity,  and  affection,  and  all  the  courtesies  necessary 
to  maintain  affection,  are  rationally  obligatory  upon  those  who  are 

(1)  Commentaries  on  the  Laxcs  o/DJoses.  (2)  Allen's  .Modem  Judaism. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  291 

connected  by  the  nuptial  bond ;  but  in  Christianity  that  fidelity  is 
guarded  by  the  express  law,  "  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery  ;,: 
and  by  our  Lord's  exposition  of  the  spirit  of  that  law,  which  forbids 
the  indulgence  of  loose  thoughts  and  desires,  and  places  the  purity 
of  the  heart  under  the  guardianship  of  that  hallowed  fear  which 
his  authority  tends  to  inspire.  Affection,  too,  is  made  a  matter  of 
diligent  cultivation  upon  considerations,  and  by  a  standard,  peculiar 
to  our  religion.  Husbands  are  placed  in  a  relation  to  their  wives3 
similar  to  that  which  Christ  bears  to  his  Church,  and  his  example 
is  thus  made  their  rule  :  As  Christ  "  gave  himself,"  his  life,  "  for 
the  Church,"  Eph.  v,  25,  so  are  they  to  hazard  life  for  their  wives. 
As  Christ  saves  his  Church,  so  is  it  the  bounden  duty  of  husbands, 
to  endeavour,  by  every  possible  means,  to  promote  the  religious 
edification  and  salvation  of  their  wives.  The  connexion  is  thus 
exalted  into  a  religious  one ;  and  when  love  which  knows  no 
abatement,  protection  at  the  hazard  of  life,  and  a  tender  and  con- 
stant solicitude  for  the  salvation  of  a  wife,  are  thus  enjoined,  the 
greatest  possible  security  is  established  for  the  exercise  of  kindness 
and  fidelity.  The  oneness  of  this  union  is  also  more  forcibly  stated 
in  Scripture  than  any  where  beside  :  "  They  twain  shall  be  one 
flesh."  "  So  ought  men  to  love  their  wives  as  their  mm  bodies ;  he 
that  loveth  his  wife  loveth  himself.  For  no  man  ever  yet  hated  his 
own  flesh,  but  nourisheth  and  cherisheth  it,  even  as  the  Lord  the 
Church."  Precept  and  illustration  can  go  no  higher  than  this; 
and  nothing  evidently  is  wanting  either  of  direction  or  authority  to 
raise  the  state  of  marriage  into  the  highest,  most  endearing,  and 
sanctified  relation  in  which  two  human  beings  can  stand  to  each 
other.  The  duties  of  wives  are  reciprocal  to  those  of  husbands. 
The  outline  in  the  Note  below (3)  comprises  both:  it  presents  a 

(3)    PARTICULAR  DUTIES   OF  WIVES.  PARTICULAR  DUTIES  OF  HUSBANDS. 

Xtibjection,  the  gcnerall  head  of  all  wives  Wisdom  and  love,  the  gencrall  heads  of 

duties.  all  husl;:ir,ds  duties. 

Acknowledgment  of  an  husbands  supe-  Acknowledgment,  of  a  wives  neere  con- 

rioritie.  junction  and  fellowship  with  her  hus- 
band. 

A  due  estecme  of  her  owne  husband  as  A  good  esteeme  of  his  own  wife  as  the 

the  best  for  her,  and  worthy  of  honour  best  for  him,  and  worthy  of  love  on  hi? 

on  her  part.  part. 

An  inward  wive-like  fear.  An  inward  intire  affection. 

An  outward  reverend  carriage  towards  An  outward  amiable  carriage  towards 

her  husband,   which  consisteth  in  a  his  wife,  which  consisteth  in  an  hus- 

wive-like  sobrietie,  mildnesse,  curtis-  band-like  gravity,  mildnesse,  courteous 

sic,  and  modestie  in  apparel,  acceptance  of  her  curtissic,  and  allow- 
ing her  to  wear  fit  apparel. 


292 


THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTED. 


[PARI 

series  of  obligations  which  are  obviously  drawn  from  the  New 
Testament ;  but  which  nothing  except  that  could  furnish.  The 
extract  is  made  from  an  old  writer,  and,  although  expressed  in 


Reverend  speech  to  and  of  her  husband. 
Obedience. 


Forbearing  to  do  without,  or  against  her 
husband's  consent,  such  things  as  he 
hath  power  to  order,  as,  to  dispose  and 
order  the  common  goods  of  the  familie, 
and  the  allowance  for  it,  or  children, 
servants,  cattell,  guests,  journies,  &c. 

A  ready  yielding  to  what  her  husband 
would  have  done.  This  is  manifested 
by  a  willingnesse  to  dwell  where  he 
wili,  to  come  when  he  calls,  and  to  do 
what  he  requireth. 

A  patient  bearing  of  any  reproofe,  and  a 
ready  redressing  of  that  for  which  she 
is  justly  reproved. 

Contentment  with  her  husbands  present 
estate. 

Such  a  subjection  as  may  stand  with  her 
subjection  to  Christ. 

Such  a  subjection  as  the  Church  yieldeth 
to  Christ,  which  is  sincere,  pure,  cheer- 
full,  constant,  for  conscience  sake. 


Mild  and  loving  speech  to  and  of  his 
wife. 

A  wise  maintaining  his  authority,  and 
forbearing  to  exact  all  that  is  in  his 
power. 

A  ready  yielding  to  his  wives  request, 
and  giving  a  generall  consent  and  liber- 
tie  unto  her  to  order  the  affaires  of  the 
house,  children,  servants,  &c.  And  a 
free  allowing  her  something  to  bestow 
as  she  seeth  occasion. 

A  forbearing  to  exact  more  than  his  wife 
is  willing  to  doe,  or  to  force  her  to  dwell 
where  it  is  not  meet,  or  to  enjoyne  her 
to  do  things  that  are-  unmeet  in  them- 
selves, or  against  her  mind. 

A  wise  ordering  of  reproofe,  not  using  it 
without  just  and  weighty  cause,  and 
then  privately,  and  meekly. 

A  provident  care  for  his  wife,  according 
to  his  abilities. 

A  forbearing  to  exact  any  thing  which 
stands  not  with  a  good  conscience. 

Such  a  love  as  Christ  beareth  to  the 
Church,  and  man  to  himselfe,  which 
is  first  free,  in  deed  and  truth,  pure, 
chaste,  constant. 


AEERRATIONS  OF  WIVES  FROM  THEIB 
PARTICULAR  DUTIES. 


ABERRATIONS  OF  HUSBANDS  FROM   THEIR 
PARTICULAR  DUTIES. 


Ambition,   the  generall    ground   of   the 

aberrations  of  wives. 
A  conceit  that  wives  are  their  husbands 

equals. 
V  conceit  that  she  could  better  subject 

herselfe  to  any  other  man  than  to  her 

own  husband. 
An  inward  despising  of  her  husband. 

Unreverend  behaviour  towards  her  hus- 
band, manifested  by  lightnesse,  sullen- 
nesse,  scomefulnesse,  and  vanity  in  her 
attire. 

f  Jnreverend  speech  to  and  of  her  hus- 
band. 

A  stout  standing  on  her  owne  will. 

A  peremptory  undertaking  to  do  things 
as  she  list,  without  and  against  her 
husbands  consent,  This  is  manifested 


Want  of  wisdome  and  love,  the  generall 
grounds  of  the  aberrations  of  husbands. 
Too  mean  account  of  wives. 

A  preposterous  conceit  of  his  owne  wife 
to  be  the  worst  of  all,  and  that  he  could 
love  any  but  her. 

A  stoical)  disposition,  without  all  heat 
of  affection. 

An  unbeseeming  carriage  towards  his 
wife,  manifested  by  his  baseness,  ty- 
rannicail  usage  of  her,  loftinesse,  rash- 
nesse,  and  niggardlinesse. 

Harsh,  proud,  and  bitter  speeches  to  and 
of  his  wife. 

Losing  of  his  authority. 

Too  much  strictnesse  over  his  wife.  This 
is  manifested  by  restraining  her  from 
doing  any  thing  without  particular  and 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  29o 

homely  phrase,  will  be  admired  for  discrimination  and  compre- 
hensiveness. 

The  Duties  of  Children  is  a  branch  of  Christian  morality 
which  receives  both  illustration  and  authority  in  a  very  remarkable 
and  peculiar  manner  from  the  Scriptures.  "  Honour  thy  father  and 
thy  mother,"  is  a  precept  which  occupies  a  place  in  those  Tables 
of  Law  which  were  written  at  first  by  the  finger  of  God ;  and 
is,  as  the  Apostle  Paul  notes,  "  the  first  commandment  with  pro- 
mise." The  meaning  of  the  term  honour  is  comprehensive,  and 
imports,  as  appears  from  various  passages  in  which  it  occurs,  reve- 
rence, affection,  and  grateful  obedience.  It  expresses  at  once  a 
principle  and  a  feeling,  each  of  which  must  influence  the  practice  ; 
one  binding  obedience  upon  the  conscience,  the  other  rendering  it 
the  free  effusion  of  the  heart ;  one  securing  the  great  points  of 
duty,  and  the  other  giving  rise  to  a  thousand  tender  sentiments  and 
courtesies  which  mutually  meliorate  the  temper,  and  open  one  of 
the  richest  sources  of  domestic  felicity. 

The  honouring  of  parents  is  likewise  enforced  in  Scripture,  by 
a  temporal  promise.  This  is  not  peculiar  to  the  Law ;  for  when 
the  Apostle  refers  to  this  "as  the  first  commandment  with  promise," 
and  adds,  w  that  it  may  be  well  with  thee,  and  that  thou  mayest  live 
long  on  the  earth,"  Eph.  vi,  3,  4,  he  clearly  intimates  that  this 
promise  is  carried  forward  into  the  Christian  dispensation ;  and 
though  it  is  undoubtedly  modified  by  the  circumstances  of  an 

by  privy  purloyning  his  goods,  taking  expresse  consent,  taking  too  strict 
allowance,  ordering  children,  servants,  account  of  her,  and  allowing  her  no 
and  cattell,  feasting  strangers,  making  more  than  is  needfull  for  her  owne  pri- 
journies  and  vows,  as  herselfe  listeth.  vate  use. 
An  obstinate  standing  upon  her  owne  Too  lordly  a  standing  upon  the  highest 
will,  making  her  husband  dwell  where  step  of  his  authority:  being  too  frc- 
she  will,  and  refusing  to  goe  when  he  quent,  insolent,  and  peremptory,  in 
calls,  or  to  doe  any  thing  upon  his  commanding;  things  frivolous,  unmeet, 
command.  and  against  his  wifes  minde  and  con- 

science. 
Disdaine  at  reproofe :  giving  word  for     Rashnesse  and  bitternesse  in  reproving : 
word :   and  waxing  worse  for  being        and  that  too  frequently,  on  slight  oc- 
reproved.  casions,  and  disgracefully  before  chil- 

dren, servants,  and  strangers. 
Discontent  at  her  husbands  estate.  A  carelesse  neglect  of  his  wife,  and  nig- 

gardly dealing  with  her,  and  that  in 
her  weaknesse. 
Such  a  pleasing  of  her  husband  as  offend-     A  commanding  of  unlawfull  things. 

eth  Christ. 
Such  a  subjection  as  is  most  unlike  to    Such  a  disposition  as  is  most  unlike  to 
the  Church's,  viz.  fained,  forced,  fickle,        Christ's,  and   to  that  which  a  man 
&c.  beareth  to  himselfe,  viz.  compliment, 

impure,  for  by  respects,  inconstant,  &c. 

33* 


294  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

economy  which  is  not  so  much  founded  upon  temporal  promises 
as  the  Law,  it  retains  its  full  force  as  a  general  declaration  oi' 
special  favour  on  the  part  of  God.  This  duty  also  derives  a  most 
influential  and  affecting  illustration  from  the  conduct  of  our  Lord, 
who  was  himself  an  instance  of  subjection  to  parents  ;  of  the  kind- 
est behaviour  to  them ;  and  who,  amidst  his  agonies  on  the  cross, 
commended  his  weeping  mother  to  the  special  regard  of  the  beloved 
disciple,  John,  charging  him  with  her  care  and  support  as  a  "  son," 
in  his  own  stead.  In  no  system  of  mere  ethics,  certainly,  is  this 
great  duty,  on  which  so  much  of  human  interest  and  felicity  depends, 
and  which  exerts  so  much  influence  upon  society,  thus  illustrated, 
and  thus  enforced. 

The  duties  of  children  may  be  thus  sketched. 

Love,  which  is  founded  upon  esteem  and  reverence,  comprise? 
gratitude  also  ;  no  small  degree  of  which  is  obligatory  upon  every 
child  for  the  unwearied  cares,  labours,  and  kindness  of  parental 
affection.  In  the  few  unhappy  instances  in  which  esteem  for  a 
parent  can  have  little  place,  gratitude,  at  least,  ought  to  remain ; 
nor  can  any  case  arise  in  which  the  obligation  of  filial  love  can 
be  cancelled. 

Reverence,  which  consists  in  that  honourable  esteem  of  parents 
which  children  ought  to  cherish  in  their  hearts,  and  from  which 
springs  on  the  one  hand  the  desire  to  please,  and  on  the  other  the 
i'ear  to  offend.  The  fear  of  a  child  is,  however,  opposed  to  the  fear 
of  a  slave  ;  the  latter  has  respect  chiefly  to  the  punishment  which 
may  be  inflicted ;  but  the  other  being  mixed  with  love,  and  the 
desire  to  be  loved,  has  respect  to  the  offence  which  may  be  taken 
by  a  parent,  his  grief,  and  his  displeasure.  Hence  the  fear  of  God. 
as  a  grace  of  the  Spirit  in  the  regenerate,  is  compared  to  the  fear 
of  children.  This  reverential  regard  due  to  parents  has  its  external 
expression  in  all  honour  and  civility,  whether  in  words  or  actions. 
The  behaviour  is  to  be  submissive,  the  speech  respectful,  reproof 
is  to  be  borne  by  them  with  meekness,  and  the  impatience  of  parents 
sustained  in  silence.  Children  are  bound  to  close  their  eyes  as  much 
as  possible  upon  the  failings  and  infirmities  of  the  authors  of  their 
being,  and  always  to  speak  of  them  honourably  among  themselves, 
and  in  the  presence  of  others.  "  The  hearts  of  all  men  go  along 
with  Noah  in  laying  punishment  upon  Ham  for  his  unnatural  and 
profane  derision,  and  love  the  memory  of  those  sons  that  would  not 
see  themselves,  nor  suffer  others  to  be  the  witnesses  of  the  miscar- 
riages of  their  father."  In  the  duty  of  "  honouring"  parents,  is 
also  included  their  support  when  in  necessity.  This  appears  from 
our  Lord's  application  of  this  commandment  of  the  Law  in  his 


iHIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  29J 

reproof  of  the  Pharisees,  who,  if  they  had  made  a  vow  of  their  pro- 
perty, thought  it  then  lawful  to  withhold  assistance  from  their 
parents,  Matt,  xv,  4-6. 

To  affection  and  reverence,  is  to  be  added, 

Obedience,  which  is  universal :  "  Children,  obey  your  parents 
in  all  things;"  with  only  one  restriction,  which  respects  the  con- 
sciences of  children,  when  at  age  to  judge  for  themselves.  The 
Apostle  therefore  adds,  "  in  tJie  Lord."  That  this  limits  the  obe- 
dience of  children  to  the  lawful  commands  of  parents,  is  clear  also 
from  our  Lord's  words,  "  If  any  love  father  or  mother  more  than 
me  he  is  not  worthy  of  me."  God  is  to  be  loved  and  obeyed  above 
all.  In  all  lawful  things  the  rule  is  absolute ;  and  the  obedience, 
like  that  we  owe  to  God,  ought  to  be  cheerful  and  unwearied. 
Should  it  chance  to  cross  our  inclinations,  this  will  be  no  excuse 
for  hesitancy,  much  less,  for  refusal. 

One  of  the  principal  cases  in  which  this  principle  is  often  most 
severely  tried,  is  that  of  marriage.  The  general  rule  clearly  is,  that 
neither  son  nor  daughter  ought  to  marry  against  the  command  ot 
a  father,  with  whom  the  prime  authority  of  the  family  is  lodged ; 
nor  even  without  the  consent  of  the  mother,  should  the  father  be 
willing,  if  she  can  lind  any  weighty  reason  for  her  objection ;  for, 
although  the  authority  of  the  mother  is  subordinate  and  secondary, 
yet  is  she  entitled  to  obedience  from  the  child.  There  is,  however, 
a  considerable  difference  between  marrying  at  the  command  of  a 
parent,  and  marrying  against  his  prohibition.  In  the  first  case, 
children  are  more  at  liberty  than  in  the  other ;  yet  even  here,  the 
wishes  of  parents  in  this  respect  are  to  be  taken  into  most  serious 
consideration,  with  a  preponderating  desire  to  yield  to  them :  but 
if  a  child  feels  that  his  affections  still  refuse  to  run  in  the  course  of 
the  parents'  wishes ;  if  he  is  conscious  that  he  cannot  love  his 
intended  wife  "as  himself,"  as  "his  own  flesh;"  he  is  prohibited 
by  a  higher  rule,  which  presents  an  insuperable  barrier  to  his  com- 
pliance. In  this  case  the  child  is  at  liberty  to  refuse,  if  it  is  done 
deliberately,  and  expressed  with  modesty  and  proper  regret  at  not 
being  able  to  comply,  for  the  reasons  stated ;  and  every  parent 
ought  to  dispense  freely  with  the  claim  of  obedience.  But  to  marry 
in  opposition  to  a  parent's  express  prohibition,  is  a  very  grave  case 
The  general  rule  lies  directly  against  this  act  of  disobedience,  as 
against  all  others,  and  the  violation  of  it  is  therefore  sin.  And  what, 
blessing  can  be  expected  to  follow  such  marriages  1  or  rather,  what 
curse  may  not  be  feared  to  follow  them  1  The  law  of  God  is  trans- 
gressed, and  the  image  of  his  authority  in  parents  is  despised.  Those 
exceptions  to  this  rule  which  can  be  justified,  are  very  few. 


290  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

In  no  case  but  where  the  parties  have  attained  the  full  legal  age 
of  twenty-one  years,  ought  an  exception  to  be  even  considered ; 
but  it  may  perhaps  be  allowed,  1,  When  the  sole  objection  of  the 
parent  is  the  marriage  of  his  child  with  a  person  fearing  God. 
3.  When  the  sole  reason  given  is,  a  wish  to  keep  a  child  unmarried 
from  caprice,  interest,  or  other  motive,  which  no  parent  has  a  right 
to  require,  when  the  child  is  of  legal  age.  3.  When  the  objections 
are  simply  those  of  prejudice,  wirhout  reasonable  ground  ;  but  in 
this  case,  the  child  ought  not  to  assume  to  be  the  sole  judge  of  the 
parent's  reasons ;  and  would  not  be  at  liberty  to  act,  unless  sup- 
ported by  the  opinion  of  impartial  and  judicious  friends,  whose 
advice  and  mediation  ought  to  be  asked,  in  order  that,  in  so  deli- 
cate an  affair,  he  or  she  may  proceed  with  a  clear  conscience. 

The  persuading  a  daughter  to  elope  from  her  parents'  house, 
where  the  motive  is  no  other  than  the  wilful  following  of  personal 
affection,  which  spurns  at  parental  control  and  authority,  must, 
therefore,  be  considered  as  a  great  crime.  It  induces  the  daughter 
to  commit  a  very  criminal  act  of  disobedience  ;  and,  on  the  part  oi 
the  man,  it  is  a  worse  kind  of  felony  than  stealing  the  property  of 
another.  "For  children  are  much  more  properly  a  man's  own 
than  his  goods,  and  the  more  highly  to  be  esteemed,  by  how  much 
reasonable  creatures  are  to  be  preferred  before  senseless  things."  (4) 
The  Duties  of  Parents  are  exhibited  with  equal  clearness 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  contain  a  body  of  most  important  practical 
instructions. 

The  first  duty  is  Love,  which,  although  a  natural  instinct,  is  yet 
to  be  cultivated  and  nourished  by  Christians  under  a  sense  of  duty, 
and  by  frequent  meditation  upon  all  those  important  and  interest- 
ing relations  in  which  religion  has  placed  them  and  their  offspring. 
The  duty  of  sustentation  and  care,  therefore,  under  the  most 
trying  circumstances,  is  imperative  upon  parents  ;  for,  though  this 
is  not  directly  enjoined,  it.  is  supposed  necessarily  to  follow  from 
that  parental  love  which  the  Scriptures  inculcate ;  and  also,  because 
the  denial  of  either  to  infants  would  destroy  them,  and  thus  the 
unnatural  parent  would  be  involved  in  the  crime  of  murder. 

To  this  follows  Instruction,  care  for  the  mind  succeeding  the 
nourishment  and  care  of  the  body.  This  relates  to  the  providing 
such  an  education  for  children  as  is  suited  to  their  condition,  and 
by  which  they  may  be  fitted  +o  gain  a  reputable  livelihood  when 
they  are  of  age  to  apply  themselves  to  business.  But  it  specially 
relates  to  their  instruction  in  the  doctrines  of  holy  writ.     This  i? 

(4)  Gouge  On  Relative  Duties, 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  297 

clearly  what  the  Apostle  Paul  means,  Eph.  vi,  4,  by  directing; 
parents  to  "  bring  them  up  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the 
Lord."  A  parent  is  considered  in  Scripture  as  a  Priest  in  his 
own  family,  which  is  a  view  of  this  relation  not  to  be  found  in 
ethical  writers,  or  deducible  from  any  principles  from  which  they 
would  infer  parental  duties,  independently  of  revelation  ;  and  from 
this  it  derives  a  most  exalted  character.  The  offices  of  sacrifice, 
intercession,  and  religious  instruction,  were  all  performed  by  the 
Patriarchs ;  and,  as  we  have  already  seen,  although,  under  the 
Law,  the  offering  of  sacrifices  was  restrained  to  the  appointed 
Priesthood,  yet  was  it  still  the  duty  of  the  head  of  the  family  to 
bring  his  sacrifices  for  immolation  in  the  prescribed  manner ;  and 
so  far  was  the  institution  of  public  teachers  from  being  designed  to 
supersede  the  father's  office,  that  the  heads  of  the  Jewish  families 
are  specially  enjoined  to  teach  the  law  to  their  children  diligently, 
and  daily,  Deut.  vi,  7.  Under  the  same  view  does  Christianity 
regard  the  heads  of  its  families,  as  Priests  in  their  houses,  offering 
spiritual  gifts  and  sacrifices,  and  as  the  religious  instructers  of  their 
children.  Hence  it  is,  in  the  passage  above  quoted,  that  "fathers" 
are  commanded  "to  bring  up  their  children  in  the  nurture  and 
admonition  of  the  Lord  ;"  or,  in  other  words,  in  the  knowledge  of 
the  doctrines,  duties,  motives,  and  hopes  of  the  Christian  religion. 
This  is  a  work,  therefore,  which  belongs  to  the  very  office  of  a 
father  as  the  Priest  of  his  household,  and  cannot  be  neglected  by 
him,  but  at  his  own,  and  his  children's  peril.  Nor  is  it  to  be 
occasionally  and  cursorily  performed,  but  so  that  the  object  ma) 
be  attained,  namely,  that  they  may  "know  the  Scriptures  from 
their  childhood,"  and  have  stored  their  minds  with  their  laws,  and 
doctrines,  and  promises,  as  their  guide  in  future  life  ;  a  work 
which  will  require,  at  least,  as  much  attention  from  the  Christian 
as  from  the  Jewish  parent,  who  was  commanded  on  this  wise, — 
"  Thou  shalt  teach  them  diligently  to  thy  children,  and  thou  shalr 
talk  of  them  when  thou  sittest  in  thy  house,  and  when  thou  walk- 
est  by  the  way,  when  thou  liest  down,  and  when  thou  risest  up.': 
The  practice  of  the  Jews  in  this  respect,  appears  to  have  been 
adopted  by  the  Christians  of  the  primitive  Churches,  which  were 
composed  of  both  Jewish  and  Gentile  converts  in  almost  every 
place;  and  from  them  it  is  probable  that  the  early  customs  of 
teaching  children  to  commit  portions  of  Scripture  to  memory, 
to  repeat  prayers  night  and  morning,  and  to  approach  their 
parents  for  their  blessing,  might  be  derived.  The  last  pleasing 
and  impressive  form,  which  contains  a  recognition  of  the  do- 
mestic Priesthood,  as  inherent  in  the  head  of  any  family,  has 


298  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

in  this  country  grown  of  late  into  disuse,  which  is  much  to  be 
regretted. 

It  is  also  essential  to  the  proper  discharge  of  the  parental  duty 
of  instructing  children,  that  every  means  should  be  used  to  render 
what  is  taught  influential  upon  the  heart  and  conduct.  It  is,  there- 
fore, solemnly  imperative  upon  parents  to  be  "  holy  in  all  manner 
of  conversation,  and  godliness,"  and  thus  to  enforce  truth  by 
example.  It  concerns  them,  as  much  as  Ministers,  to  be  anxious 
for  the  success  of  their  labours ;  and  recognising  the  same  prin- 
ciple, that  "  God  giveth  the  increase,"  to  be  abundant  in  prayers 
for  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  their  children.  Both  as  a  means 
of  grace,  and  in  recognition  of  God's  covenant  of  mercy  with  them 
and  their  seed  after  them,  it  behoves  them  also  to  bring  their  chil- 
dren to  baptism  in  their  infancy ;  to  explain  to  them  the  baptismal 
covenant  when  they  are  able  to  understand  it;  and  to  habituate 
them  from  early  years  io  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath,  and  to 
regular  attendance  on  the  public  worship  of  God. 

The  Government  of  children,  is  another  great  branch  of 
parental  duty,  in  which  both  the  parents  are  bound  cordially  to 
unite.  Like  all  other  kinds  of  government  appointed  by  God,  the 
end  is  the  good  of  those  subject  to  it ;  and  it  therefore  excludes  all 
caprice,  vexation,  and  tyranny.  In  the  case  of  parents,  it  is  emi- 
nently a  government  of  love,  and  therefore,  although  it  includes 
strictness,  it  necessarily  excludes  severity.  The  mild  and  benevo- 
lent character  of  our  Divine  religion  displays  itself  here,  as  in  every 
other  instance  where  the  heat  of  temper,  the  possession  of  power, 
or  the  ebullitions  of  passion,  might  be  turned  against  the  weak  and 
unprotected.  The  civil  laws  of  those  countries  in  which  Christian- 
ity was  first  promulgated,  gave  great  power  to  parents  over  their 
children,  (5)  which,  in  the  unfeeling  spirit  of  Paganism,  was  often 
harshly,  and  even  cruelly,  used.  On  the  contrary,  St.  Paul  enjoins, 
"  And  ye  fathers,  provoke  not  your  children  to  wrath,"  meaning 
plainly,  by  a  rigorous  severity,  an  overbearing  and  tyrannical  be- 
haviour, tending  to  exasperate  angry  passions  in  them.  So  again, 
11  Fathers,  provoke  not  your  children,  lest  they  be  discouraged," 
discouraged  from  all  attempts  at  pleasing,  as  regarding  it  an  impos- 
sible task,  "  and  be  unfitted  to  pass  through  the  world  with  advan- 
tage, when  their  spirits  have  been  unreasonably  broken  under  an 
oppressive  yoke,  in  the  earliest  years  of  their  life."(6)  But  though 
the  parental  government  is  founded  upon  kindness,  and  can  nevei 
be  separated  from  it,  when  rightly  understood  and  exercised,  it  is 

(5)  By  the  old  Roman  law,  the  father  had  the  power  of  life  and  death,  as  to  his 
.hildren,  (6)  Doddridge  On  Colossiana  iii,  21. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  290 

Still  government,  and  is  a  trust  committed  by  God  to  the  parent, 
which  must  be  faithfully  discharged.  Corporal  correction  is  not 
only  allowed,  but  is  made  a  duty  in  Scripture,  where  other  means 
would  be  ineffectual.  Yet  it  may  be  laid  down  as  a  certain 
principle,  that,  where  the  authority  of  a  parent  is  exercised  with 
constancy  and  discretion,  and  enforced  by  gravity,  kindness,  and 
character,  this  will  seldom  be  found  necessary ;  nor,  when  the 
steady  resolution  of  the  parent  to  inflict  it  when  it  is  demanded  by 
the  case,  is  once  known  to  the  child,  will  it  need  often  to  be 
repeated.  Parental  government  is  also  concerned  in  forming  the 
manners  of  children ;  in  inculcating  civility,  order,  cleanliness, 
industry,  and  economy;  in  repressing  extravagant  desires  and  gra- 
tifications in  dress  and  amusements  ;  and  in  habituating  the  will  to 
a  ready  submission  to  authority.  It  must  be  so  supreme,  whatever 
the  age  of  children  may  be,  as  to  control  the  whole  order  and  habits 
of  the  family,  and  to  exclude  all  licentiousness,  riot,  and  unbecom- 
ing amusements  from  the  house,  lest  the  curse  of  Eli  should  fall 
upon  those  who  imitate  his  example  in  not  reproving  evil  with 
sufficient  earnestness,  and  not  restraining  it  by  the  effectual  exercise 
of  authority. 

Another  duty  of  parents  is  the  comfortable  settlement  of  then 
children  in  the  world,  as  far  as  their  ability  extends.  This  include* 
the  discreet  choosing  of  a  calling,  by  which  their  children  may 
"  provide  things  honest  in  the  sight  of  all  men ;"  taking  especial 
care,  however,  that  their  moral  safety  shall  be  consulted  in  the 
choice, — a  consideration  which  too  many  disregard,  under  tin 
influence  of  carelessness,  or  a  vain  ambition.  The  "laying  up 
for  children"  is  also  sanctioned  both  by  nature,  and  by  our  reli- 
gion ;  but  this  is  not  so  to  be  understood  as  that  the  comforts  of  a 
parent,  according  to  his  rank  in  life,  should  be  abridged ;  nor  tha< 
it  should  interfere  with  those  charities  which  Christianity  has  made 
his  personal  duty. 

The  next  of  these  reciprocal  duties,  are  those  of  servant  and 

MASTER. 

This  is  a  relation  which  will  continue  to  the  end  of  time 
Equality  of  condition  is  alike  contrary  to  the  nature  of  things, 
and  to  the  appointment  of  God.  Some  must  toil,  and  others 
direct ;  some  command,  and  others  obey ;  nor  is  this  order  con- 
trary to  the  real  interest  of  the  multitude,  as  at  first  sight  it  might 
appear.  The  acquisition  of  wealth  by  a  few  affords  more  abundant, 
employment  to  the  many ;  and  in  a  well  ordered,  thriving,  and 
industrious  State,  except  in  seasons  of  peculiar  distress,  it  is  evident, 
that  the  comforts  of  the  lower  classes  are  greater  than  could  he 


300  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

attained  were  the  land  equally  divided  among  them,  and  so  left  to 
their  own  cultivation  that  no  one  should  be  the  servant  of  another. 
To  preserve  such  a  state  of  things  would  be  impossible  ;  and  could 
it  be  done,  no  arts  but  of  the  rudest  kind,  no  manufactures,  and  no 
commerce,  could  exist.  The  very  first  attempt  to  introduce  these 
would  necessarily  create  the  two  classes  of  workmen  and  employ- 
ers ;  of  the  many  who  labour  with  the  hands,  and  the  few  who 
labour  with  the  mind,  in  directing  the  operations;  and  thus  the 
equality  would  be  destroyed. 

It  is  not,  however,  to  be  denied,  that  through  the  bad  principles 
and  violent  passions  of  man,  the  relations  of  servant  and  master 
have  been  a  source  of  great  evil  and  misery.  The  more,  therefore, 
is  that  religion  to  be  valued,  which,  since  these  relations  must  exist, 
restrains  the  evil  that  is  incident  to  them,  and  shows  how  they  may 
be  made  sources  of  mutual  benevolence  and  happiness.  Wherever 
the  practical  influence  of  religion  has  not  been  felt,  servants  have 
generally  been  more  or  less  treated  with  contempt,  contumely, 
harshness,  and  oppression.  They,  on  the  contrary,  are,  from  their 
natural  corruption,  inclined  to  resent  authority,  to  indulge  selfish- 
ness, and  to  commit  fraud,  either  by  withholding  the  just  quantum 
of  labour,  or  by  direct  theft.  From  the  conflict  of  these  evils  in 
servants  and  in  masters,  too  often  result  suspicion,  cunning,  over- 
reaching, malignant  passions,  contemptuous  and  irritating  speeches, 
the  loss  of  principle  in  the  servant,  and  of  kind  and  equitable  feeling 
on  the  part  of  the  master. 

The  direct  manner  in  which  the  precepts  of  the  New  Testament 
tend  to  remedy  these  evils,  cannot  but  be  remarked.  Government 
in  masters,  as  well  as  in  fathers,  is  an  appointment  of  God,  though 
differing  in  circumstances ;  and  it  is,  therefore,  to  be  honoured. 
"Let  as  many  servants  as  are  under  the  yoke,  count  their  own 
masters  worthy  of  all  honour;"  a  direction  which  enjoins  both 
respectful  thoughts,  and  humility  and  propriety  of  external  demea- 
nour towards  them.  Obedience  to  their  commands  in  all  things 
lawful  is  next  enforced ;  which  obedience  is  to  be  grounded  on 
principle  and  conscience;  on  "singleness  of  heart,  as  unto  Christ;" 
thus  serving  a  master  with  the  same  sincerity,  the  same  desire  to  do 
the  appointed  work  well,  as  is  required  of  us  by  Christ.  This  ser- 
vice is  also  to  be  cheerful,  and  not  wrung  out  merely  by  a  sense  of 
duty :  "  Not  with  eye  service,  as  men  pleasers  ;"  not  having  respect 
simply  to  the  approbation  of  the  master,  but  "as  the  servants  of 
Christ,"  making  profession  of  his  religion,  "doing  the  will  of  God," 
in  this  branch  of  duty,  "  from  the  heart,"  with  alacrity  and  good 
feeling.  The  duties  of  servants,  stated  in  these  brief  precepts,  might 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  301 

easily  be  shown  to  comprehend  every  particular  which  can  be 
justly  required  of  persons  in  this  station  ;  and  the  whole  is  enforced 
by  a  sanction  which  could  have  no  place  but  in  a  revelation  from 
God, — "  knowing  that  whatsoever  good  thing  any  man  doeth,  the 
same  shall  he  receive  of  the  Lord,  whether  he  be  bond  or  free," 
Eph.  vi,  5.  In  other  words,  even  the  common  duties  of  servants, 
when  faithfully,  cheerfully,  and  piously  performed,  are  by  Chris- 
tianity made  rewardable  actions :  "  Of  the  Lord  ye  shall  receive 
a  reward." 

The  duties  of  servants  and  masters  are,  however,  strictly  reci- 
procal. Hence  the  Apostle  continues  his  injunctions  as  to  the  right 
discharge  of  these  relations,  by  saying,  immediately  after  he  had 
prescribed  the  conduct  of  servants,  "  And  ye,  masters,  do  the  same 
things  unto  them ;"  that  is,  act  towards  them  upon  the  same 
equitable,  conscientious,  and  benevolent  principles,  as  you  exact 
from  them.  He  then  grounds  his  rules,  as  to  masters,  upon  the 
great  and  influential  principle,  "  Knowing  that  your  Master  is  in 
heaven ;"  that  you  are  under  authority,  and  are  accountable  to 
him  for  your  conduct  to  your  servants.  Thus  masters  are  put 
under  the  eye  of  God,  who  not  only  maintains  their  authority, 
when  properly  exercised,  by  making  their  servants  accountable 
for  any  contempt  of  it,  and  for  every  other  failure  of  duty,  but 
also  holds  the  master  himself  responsible  for  its  just  and  mild 
exercise.  A  solemn  and  religious  aspect  is  thus  at  once  given  to 
a  relation,  which  by  many  is  considered  as  one  merely  of  interest. 
When  the  Apostle  enjoins  it  on  masters  to  "  forbear  threatening," 
he  inculcates  the  treatment  of  servants  with  kindness  of  manner, 
with  humanity,  and  good  nature ;  and,  by  consequence  also,  the 
cultivation  of  that  benevolent  feeling  towards  persons  in  this  con- 
dition, which  in  all  rightly  influenced  minds,  will  how  from  the 
consideration  of  their  equality  with  themselves  in  the  sight  of  God  ; 
their  equal  share  in  the  benefits  of  redemption ;  their  relation  to 
us  as  brethren  in  Christ,  if  they  are  "  partakers  of  like  precious 
faith ;"  and  their  title  to  the  common  inheritance  of  heaven,  where 
all  those  temporary  distinctions  on  which  human  vanity  is  so  apt 
to  fasten,  shall  be  done  away.  There  will  also  not  be  wanting  in 
such  minds,  a  consideration  of  the  service  rendered  ;  (for  the 
benefit  is  mutual ;)  and  a  feeling  of  gratitude  for  service  faithfully 
performed,  although  it  is  compensated  by  wages  or  hire. 

To  benevolent  sentiment  the  Apostle,  however,  adds  the  prin- 
ciples of  justice  and  equity  :  "  Masters,  give  to  your  servants  that 
which  is  just  and  equal,  knowing  that  ye  also  have  a  Master  in 
heaven,"  who  i8  the  avenger  of  injustice.   The  terms  just  and  equal, 

Vol.  III.  34 


302  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

though  terms  of  near  affinity,  have  a  somewhat  different  significa- 
tion. To  give  that  which  is  just  to  a  servant,  is  to  deal  with  him 
according  to  an  agreement  made ;  but  to  give  him  what  is  equal, 
is  to  deal  fairly  and  honestly  with  him,  and  to  return  what  is  his 
due  in  reason  and  conscience,  even  when  there  are  circumstances 
in  the  case  which  strict  law  would  not  oblige  us  to  take  into  the 
account.  "  Justice  makes  our  contracts  the  measure  of  our  deal- 
ings with  others,  and  equity  our  consciences."  (1)  Equity  here  may 
also  have  respect  particularly  to  that  important  rule  which  obliges 
us  to  do  to  others  what  we  would,  in  the  same  circumstances,  have 
them  to  do  to  us.  This  rule  of  equity  has  a  large  range  in  the 
treatment  of  servants.  It  excludes  all  arbitrary  and  tyrannical 
government ;  it  teaches  masters  to  respect  the  strength  and  capa- 
city of  their  servants  ;  it  represses  rage  and  passion,  contumely  and 
insult ;  and  it  directs  that  their  labour  shall  not  be  so  extended  as 
not  to  leave  proper  time  for  rest,  for  attendance  on  God's  worship, 
and,  at  proper  seasons,  for  recreation. 

The  religious  duties  of  masters  are  also  of  great  importance. 
Under  the  Old  Testament  the  servants  of  a  house  partook  of 
the  common  benefit  of  the  true  religion,  as  appears  from  the  case 
of  the  servants  of  Abraham,  who  were  all  brought  into  the  cove- 
nant of  circumcision  ;  and  from  the  early  prohibition  of  idolatrous 
practices  in  families,  and,  consequently,  the  maintenance  of  the 
common  worship  of  God.  The  same  consecration  of  whole  fami- 
lies to  God  we  see  in  the  New  Testament;  in  the  baptism  of 
"  houses,"  and  the  existence  of  domestic  Churches.  The  practice 
of  inculcating  the  true  religion  upon  servants,  passed  from  the 
Jews  to  the  first  Christians,  and  followed  indeed  from  the  consci- 
entious employment  of  the  master's  influence  in  favour  of  piety ;  a 
point  to  which  we  shall  again  advert. 

From  all  this  arises  the  duty  of  instructing  servants  in  the- 
principles  of  religion ;  of  teaching  them  to  read,  and  furnishing 
them  with  the  Scriptures  ;  of  having  them  present  at  family  wor- 
ship ;  and  of  conversing  with  them  faithfully  and  affectionately 
respecting  their  best  interests.  In  particular,  it  is  to  be  observed, 
that  servants  have  by  the  law  of  God  a  right  to  the  Sabbath,  of 
which  no  master  can,  without  sin,  deprive  them.  They  are  entitled 
under  that  law  to  rest  on  that  day;  and  that  not  only  for  the  recrea- 
tion of  their  strength  and  spirits,  but,  especially,  to  enable  them  to 
attend  public  worship,  and  to  read  the  Scriptures,  and  pray  in 
private.  Against  this  duty  all  those  offend  who  employ  servants 
in  works  of  gain ;  and  also  those  who  do  not  so  arrange  the  affairs 

(7)  Fleetwood's  Relative  Duties. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  303 

of  their  households,  that  domestic  servants  may  be  as  little  occupied 
as  possible  with  the  affairs  of  the  house,  in  order  that  they  may  be 
able  religiously  to  use  a  day  which  is  made  as  much  theirs  as  their 
masters',  by  the  express  letter  of  the  law  of  God ;  nor  can  the 
blessing  of  God  be  expected  to  rest  upon  families  where  this 
shocking  indifference  to  the  religious  interests  of  domestics,  and 
this  open  disregard  of  the  Divine  command,  prevail.  A  Jewish 
strictness  in  some  particulars  is  not  bound  upon  Christians  :  as  for 
example,  the  prohibition  against  lighting  fires.  These  were  parts 
of  the  municipal,  not  the  moral  law  of  the  Jews ;  and  they  have 
respect  to  a  people  living  in  a  certain  climate,  and  in  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances. But  even  these  prohibitions  are  of  use  as  teaching  us 
self  denial,  and  that  in  all  cases  we  ought  to  keep  within  the  rules 
of  necessity.  Unnecessary  occupations  are  clearly  forbidden  even 
when  they  do  not  come  under  the  description  of  work  for  gain ; 
and  when  they  are  avoided,  there  will  be  sufficient  leisure  for  every 
part  of  a  family  to  enjoy  the  Sabbath  as  a  day  of  rest,  and  as  a  day 
of  undistracted  devotion.  We  may  here  also  advert  to  that  heavy 
national  offence  which  still  hangs  upon  us,  the  denying  to  the  great 
majority  of  our  bond  slaves  in  the  West  Indies,  those  Sabbath 
rights  which  are  secured  to  them  by  the  very  religion  we  profess. 
Neither  as  a  day  of  rest,  nor  as  a  day  of  worship,  is  this  sacred  day 
granted  to  them ;  and  for  this  our  insolent  and  contemptuous  de- 
fiance of  God's  holy  law,  we  must  be  held  accountable.  This  is  a 
consideration  which  ought  to  induce  that  part  of  the  community 
who  retain  any  fear  of  God,  to  be  unwearied  in  their  applications 
to  the  legislature  until  this  great  reproach,  this  weight  of  offence 
against  religion  and  humanity,  shall  be  taken  away  from  us. 

The  employment  of  influence  for  the  religious  benefit  of  servants, 
forms  another  part  of  the  duty  of  every  Christian  master.  This 
appears  to  be  obligatory  upon  the  general  principle,  that  every 
thing  which  can  be  used  by  us  to  promote  the  will  of  God,  and  to 
benefit  others,  is  a  "  talent"  committed  to  us,  which  we  are  required 
by  our  Lord  to  "  occupy."  It  is  greatly  to  be  feared,  that  this  duty 
is  much  neglected  among  professedly  religious  masters  ;  that  even 
domestic  servants  are  suffered  to  live  in  a  state  of  spiritual  danger, 
without  any  means  being  regularly  and  affectionately  used  to  bring 
them  to  the  practical  knowledge  of  the  truth  ;  means  which,  if  used 
with  judgment  and  perseverance,  and  enforced  by  the  natural  influ- 
ence of  a  superior,  might  pi-ove  in  many  instances  both  corrective 
and  saving.  But  if  this  duty  be  much  neglected  in  households,  it 
is  much  more  disregarded  as  to  that  class  of  servants  who  are 
employed  as  day  labourers  by  the  farmer,  as  journeymen  by  the 


304  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

master  artisan,  and  as  workmen  by  the  manufacturer.  More  or 
less  the  master  comes  into  immediate  connexion  with  this  class  of 
servants ;  and  although  they  are  not  so  directly  under  his  control 
as  those  of  his  household,  nor  within  reach  of  the  same  instruction, 
yet  is  he  bound  to  discountenance  vice  among  them ;  to  recom- 
mend their  attendance  on  public  worship  ;  to  see  that  their  children 
are  sent  to  schools  ;  to  provide  religious  help  for  them  when  sick  ; 
to  prefer  sober  and  religious  men  to  others  ;  and  to  pay  them  their 
wages  in  due  time  for  market,  and  so  early  on  the  Saturday,  or 
on  the  Friday,  that  their  families  may  not  be  obstructed  in  their 
preparations  for  attending  the  house  of  God  on  the  Lord's  day 
morning.  If  the  religious  character  and  bias  of  the  master  were 
thus  felt  by  his  whole  establishment,  and  a  due  regard  paid  uni- 
formly to  justice  and  benevolence  in  the  treatment  of  all  in  his 
employ,  not  only  would  great  moral  good  be  the  result,  but  there 
would  be  reason  to  hope  that  the  relation  between  employers 
and  their  workmen,  which,  in  consequence  of  frequent  disputes 
respecting  wages  and  combinations,  has  been  rendered  suspicious 
and  vexatious,  would  assume  a  character  of  mutual  confidence 
and  reciprocal  good  will. 

Political  Justice  respects  chiefly  the  relation  of  Subjeei 
and  Sovereign,  a  delicate  branch  of  morals  in  a  religious  system 
introduced  into  the  world  under  such  circumstances  as  Chris- 
tianity, and  which  in  its  wisdom  it  has  resolved  into  general  prin- 
ciples of  easy  application,  in  ordinary  circumstances.  With  equal 
wisdom  it  has  left  extraordinary  emergencies  unprovided  for  by 
special  directions ;  though  even  in  such  cases  the  path  of  duty  is 
not  without  light  reflected  upon  it  from  the  whole  genius  and  spirit 
of  the  institution. 

On  the  origin  of  power,  and  other  questions  of  government, 
endless  controversies  have  been  held,  and  very  different  theories 
adopted,  which,  so  happily  is  the  world  exchanging  government 
by  force  for  government  by  public  opinion,  have  now  lost  much  of 
their  interest,  and  require  not,  therefore,  a  particular  examination. 

On  this  branch  of  morals,  as  on  the  others  we  have  already 
considered,  the  Scriptures  throw  a  light  peculiar  to  themselves ; 
and  the  theory  of  government  which  they  contain  will  be  found 
perfectly  accordant  with  the  experience  of  the  present  and  best 
age  of  the  world  as  to  practical  government,  and  exhibits  a  per- 
fect harmony  with  that  still  more  improved  civil  condition  which 
it  must  ultimately  assume  in  consequence  of  the  diffusion  of  know- 
ledge, freedom,  and  virtue. 

The  leading  doctrine  of  Scripture  is,  that  government  is  an 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  305 

ordinance  of  God.  It  was  manifestly  his  will  that  men  should 
live  in  society ;  this  cannot  be  doubted.  The  very  laws  he  has 
given  to  men  prescribing  their  relative  duties,  assume  the  perma- 
nent existence  of  social  relations,  and  therefore  place  them  under 
regulation.  From  this  fact  the  Divine  appointment  of  government 
flows  as  a  necessary  consequence.  A  society  cannot  exist  without 
rules  or  laws ;  and  it  therefore  follows  that  such  laws  must  be 
upheld  by  enforcement.  Hence  an  executive  power  in  some  form 
must  arise,  to  guard,  to  judge,  to  reward,  to  punish.  For  if  there 
were  no  executors  of  laws,  the  laws  would  become  a  dead  letter, 
which  would  be  the  same  thing  as  having  none  at  all ;  and  where 
there  are  no  laws,  there  can  be  no  society.  But  we  are  not  left  to 
inference.  In  the  first  ages  of  the  world  government  was  paternal, 
and  the  power  of  government  was  vested  in  parents  by  the  express 
appointment  of  God.  Among  the  Jews,  rulers,  judges,  kings,  were 
also  appointed  by  God  himself;  and  as  for  all  other  nations,  the 
New  Testament  expressly  declares,  that  "  the  powers  which  be  are 
ordained  of  God." 

The  origin  of  power  is  not,  therefore,  from  man,  but  from  God. 
It  is  not  left  as  a  matter  of  choice  to  men,  whether  they  will  sub- 
mit to  be  governed  or  not;  it  is  God's  appointment  that  they 
should  be  subject  to  those  powers  whom  he,  in  his  government  of 
the  world,  has  placed  over  them,  in  all  things  for  which  he  has 
instituted  government,  that  is,  that  it  should  be  "  a  terror  to  evil 
doers,  and  a  praise  to  them  that  do  well."  Nor  are  they  at 
liberty  "to  resist  the  power,"  when  employed  in  accomplishing 
such  legitimate  ends  of  government ;  nor  to  deny  the  right,  nor 
to  refuse  the  means,  even  when  they  have  the  power  to  do  so, 
by  which  the  supreme  power  may  restrain  evil,  and  enforce 
truth,  righteousness,  and  peace.  Every  supreme  power,  we  may 
therefore  conclude,  is  invested  with  full  and  unalienable  authority 
to  govern  well ;  and  the  people  of  every  state  are  bound,  by  the 
institution  of  God,  cheerfully  and  thankfully  to  submit  to  be  so 
governed. 

There  can,  therefore,  be  no  such  compact  between  any  parties 
as  shall  originate  the  right  of  government,  or  the  duty  of  being 
governed ;  nor  can  any  compact  annul,  in  the  least,  the  rightful 
authority  of  the  supreme  power  to  govern  efficiently  for  the  full 
accomplishment  of  the  ends  for  which  government  was  divinely 
appointed  ;  nor  can  it  place  any  limit  upon  the  duty  of  subjects  to 
be  governed  accordingly. 

We  may  conclude,  therefore,  with  Paley  and  others,  that  what 
is  called  "  the  social  compact,"  the  theory  of  Locke  and  his  fol- 

34* 


306  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

lowers  on  government,  is  a  pure  fiction.  In  point  of  fact,  men 
never  did  originate  government  by  mutual  agreement ;  and  men 
are  all  born  under  some  government,  and  become  its  subjects, 
without  having  any  terms  of  compact  proposed  to  them,  or  giving 
any  consent  to  understood  terms,  or  being  conscious  at  all  that 
their  assent  is  necessary  to  convey  the  right  to  govern  them,  or  to 
impose  upon  themselves  the  obligation  of  subjection.  The  absurdi- 
ties which  Paley  has  pointed  out  as  necessarily  following  from  the 
theory  of  the  social  compact,  appear  to  be  sufficiently  well  founded  ; 
but  the  fatal  objection  is,  that  it  makes  government  a  mere  creation 
of  man,  whereas  Scripture  makes  it  an  ordinance  of  God  :  it  sup- 
poses no  obligation  anterior  to  human  consent ;  whereas  the 
appointment  of  God  constitutes  the  obligation,  and  is  wholly  inde- 
pendent of  human  choice  and  arrangement. 

The  matter  of  government,  however,  does  not  appear  to  be 
left  so  loose  as  it  is  represented  by  the  author  of  the  Moral  and 
Political  Philosophy. 

The  ground  of  the  subject's  obligation  which  he  assigns  is, 
"  the  will  of  God  as  collected  from  expediency."  We  prefer  to 
assign  the  will  of  God  as  announced  in  the  public  law  of  the 
Scriptures  ;  and  which  manifestly  establishes  two  points  as  general 
rules  :  1.  The  positive  obligation  of  men  to  submit  to  govern- 
ment :  2.  Their  obligation  to  yield  obedience,  in  all  things  lawful, 
to  the  governments  under  which  they  live,  as  appointed  by  God 
in  the  order  of  his  providence, — "  the  powers  that  be,"  the  powers 
which  actually  exist,  "  are  ordained  of  God."  From  these  two 
principles  it  will  follow,  that  in  the  case  of  any  number  of  men 
and  women  being  thrown  together  in  some  desert  part  of  the  world, 
it  would  be  their  duty  to  marry,  to  institute  paternal  government 
in  their  families,  and  to  submit  to  a  common  government,  in 
obedience  to  the  declared  will  of  God  :  and  in  the  case  of  persons 
born  under  any  established  government,  that  they  are  required 
to  yield  submission  to  it  as  an  ordinance  of  God,  "a  power" 
already  appointed,  and  under  which  they  are  placed  in  the  order 
of  Divine  providence. 

Evident,  however,  as  these  principles  are,  they  can  never  be 
pleaded  in  favour  of  oppression  and  wrong ;  since  it  is  always  to 
be  remembered  that  the  same  Scriptures  which  establish  these 
principles  have  set  a  sufficient  number  of  guards  and  limits  about 
them,  and  that  the  rights  and  duties  of  sovereign  and  subject  are 
reciprocal.  The  manner  in  which  they  are  made  to  harmonize 
with  public  interest  and  liberty  will  appear  after  these  reciprocal 
duties  and  rights  are  explained. 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  307 

The  duties  of  the  sovereign  power,  whatever  its  form  may  be, 
are,  the  enactment  of  just  and  equal  laws ;  the  impartial  execution 
of  those  laws  in  mercy ;  the  encouragement  of  religion,  morality, 
learning,  and  industry ;  the  protection  and  sustenance  of  the  poor 
and  helpless ;  the  maintenance  of  domestic  peace,  and,  as  far  as 
the  interests  of  the  community  will  allow,  of  peace  with  all 
nations  ;  the  faithful  observance  of  all  treaties ;  an  incessant 
application  to  the  cares  of  government,  without  exacting  more 
tribute  from  the  people  than  is  necessary  for  the  real  wants  of 
the  State,  and  the  honourable  maintenance  of  its  officers ;  the 
appointment  of  inferior  magistrates  of  probity  and  fitness,  with  a 
diligent  and  strict  oversight  of  them  ;  and  finally,  the  making 
provision  for  the  continued  instruction  of  the  people  in  the  reli- 
gion of  the  Scriptures  which  it  professes  to  receive  as  a  revelation 
from  God,  and  that  with  such  a  respect  to  the  rights  of  conscience, 
as  shall  leave  all  men  free  to  discharge  their  duties  to  Him  who  is 
"  higher  than  the  highest." 

All  these  obligations  are  either  plainly  expressed,  or  are  to  be 
inferred   from   such   passages  as  the  following :    "  The   God  of 
Israel  said,  the  Rock  of  Israel  spake  to  me,  He  that  ruleth  over 
men  must  be  just,  ruling  in  the  fear  of  God ;  and  he  shall  be  as 
the  light  of  the  morning  when  the  sun  riseth,  even  a  morning 
without  clouds,  as  the  tender  grass  springeth  out  of  the  earth  by 
clear  shining  after  rain ;"  images  which  join  to  the  attribute  of 
justice  a  constant  and  diffusive  beneficence.     "  Mercy  and  truth 
preserve  the  king."     "Ye  shall  do  no  unrighteousness  in  judg- 
ment ;  thou  shalt  not  respect  the  person  of  the  poor,  nor  honour 
the  person  of  the  mighty  ;  but  in  righteousness  thou  shalt  judge." 
"  He  that  saith  unto  the  wicked,  Thou  art  righteous,"  that  is, 
acquits  the  guilty  in  judgment,  "him  shall  the  people  curse, 
nations  shall  abhor  him."     "  Moreover  thou  shalt  provide  out  of 
all  the  people  able  men  ;  such  as  fear  God ;  men  of  truth,  hating 
covetousness ;  and  place  such  over  them,  and  let  them  judge  the 
people  at  all  seasons."     "  Him  that  hath  a  high  look  and  a  proud 
heart  I  will  not  sutler.     Mine  eyes  shall  be  upon  the  faithful  in 
the  land,  that  they  may  dwell  with  me ;  he  that  walketh  in  a 
perfect  way,  he  shall  serve  me.     He  that  worketh  deceit  shall 
not  dwell  in  my  house,  he  that  telleth  lies  shall  not  tarry  in  my 
sight."    To  these  and  many  similar  passages  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment may  be  added,  as  so  many  intimations  of  the  Divine  will  as 
to  rulers,  those  patriotic  and  pious  practices  of  such  of  the  judges 
and  kings  of  Israel  as  had  the  express  approbation  of  God ;  for 
although  they  may  not  apply  as  particular  rules  in  all  cases,  they 


808  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

have  to  all  succeeding  ages  the  force  of  the  general  principles 
which  are  implied  in  them.  The  New  Testament  directions, 
although  expressed  generally,  are  equally  comprehensive ;  and  it 
is  worthy  of  remark,  that  whilst  they  assert  the  Divine  ordination 
of  "  the  powers  that  be,"  they  explicitly  mark  out  for  what  ends 
they  were  thus  appointed,  and  allow,  therefore,  of  no  plea  of 
divine  right  in  rulers  for  any  thing  contrary  to  them.  "  Render 
unto  Cesar  the  things  that  are  Cesar's,"  that  is,  things  which  are 
Cesar's  by  public  law  and  customary  impost.  "  For  rulers  are  not 
a  terror  to  good  works,  but  to  the  evil.  Wilt  thou  not  be  afraid  of 
the  power?  Do  that  which  is  good,  and  thou  shalt  have  praise 
of  the  same  ;  for  he  is  the  minister  of  God  to  thee  for  good.  But 
if  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  be  afraid ;  for  he  beareth  not  the 
sword  in  vain ;  for  he  is  the  minister  of  God,  a  revenger  to  exe- 
cute wrath  upon  him  that  doeth  evil."  "Submit  yourselves  to 
every  ordinance  of  man,  for  the  Lord's  sake  ;  whether  it  be  to  the 
king,  as  supreme,  or  unto  governors,  as  unto  them  that  are  sent 
by  him  for  the  punishment  of  evil  doers,  and  for  the  praise  of  them 
that  do  well." 

In  these  passages,  which  state  the  legitimate  ends  of  govern- 
ment, and  limit  God's  ordination  of  government  to  them,  the 
duties  of  subjects  are  partially  anticipated ;  but  they  are  capable 
of  a  fuller  enumeration. 

Subjection  and  Obedience  are  the  first ;  qualified,  however,  as  we 
know  from  the  example  of  the  Apostles,  with  exceptions  as  to  what 
is  contrary  to  conscience  and  morality.  In  such  cases  they  obeyed 
not,  but  suffered  rather.  Otherwise  the  rule  is,  "Let  every  soul  be 
subject  to  the  higher  powers  ;"  and  that  not  merely  "  for  wrath," 
fear  of  punishment,  but  "  for  conscience'  sake,"  from  a  conviction 
that  it  is  right.  "  For  this  cause  pay  ye  tribute  also  ;  for  they  are 
God's  ministers,  attending  continually  upon  this  very  thing.  Ren- 
der, therefore,  to  all  their  dues,  tribute  to  whom  tribute  is  due, 
custom  to  whom  custom,  fear  to  whom  fear,  honour  to  whom 
honour." — Supplies  for  the  necessities  of  government  are  therefore 
to  be  willingly  and  faithfully  furnished.  Rulers  are  also  to  be 
treated  with  respect  and  reverence :  "  Thou  shalt  not  speak  evil  of 
the  ruler  of  thy  people."  They  are  to  be  honoured  both  by  exter- 
nal marks  of  respect,  and  by  being  maintained  in  dignity ;  their 
actions  are  to  be  judged  of  with  candour  and  charity,  and  when 
questioned  or  blamed,  this  is  to  be  done  with  moderation,  and  not 
with  invective  or  ridicule,  a  mode  of  "  speaking  evil  of  dignities," 
which  grossly  offends  against  the  Christian  rule.  This  branch  of 
our  duties  is  greatly  strengthened  by  the  enjoined  duty  of  praying 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  309 

for  rulers,  a  circumstance  which  gives  an  efficacy  to  it  which  no 
uninspired  system  can  furnish.  "  I  exhort,  therefore,  that  first  of 
all  supplications,  prayers,  intercessions,  and  giving  of  thanks,  be 
made  for  all  men  ;  for  kings,  and  for  all  that  are  in  authority,  that 
we  may  lead  a  quiet  and  peaceable  life  in  all  godliness  and  honesty ; 
for  this  is  good  and  acceptable  in  the  sight  of  God  our  Saviour." 
This  holy  and  salutary  practice  is  founded  upon  a  recognition  of 
the  ordinance  of  God  as  to  government ;  it  recognises,  also,  the 
existing  powers  in  every  place,  as  God's  "  ministers  ;"  it  supposes 
that  all  public  affairs  are  under  Divine  control ;  it  reminds  men 
of  the  arduous  duties  and  responsibility  of  governors  ;  it  promotes 
a  benevolent,  grateful,  and  respectful  feeling  towards  them ;  and 
it  is  a  powerful  guard  against  the  factious  and  seditious  spirit. 
These  are  so  evidently  the  principles  and  tendencies  of  this  sacred 
custom,  that  when  prayer  has  been  used,  as  it  sometimes  has,  to 
convey  the  feelings  of  a  malignant,  factious,  or  light  spirit,  every 
well  disposed  mind  must  have  been  shocked  at  so  profane  a 
mockery,  and  must  have  felt  that  such  prayers  "  for  all  that  are 
in  authority,"  were  any  thing  but  "  good  and  acceptable  in  the 
sight  of  God  our  Saviour." 

Connected  as  these  reciprocal  rights  and  duties  of  rulers,  and 
of  their  subjects,  are  with  the  peace,  order,  liberty,  and  welfare  of 
society,  so  that  were  they  universally  acted  upon,  nothing  would 
remain  to  be  desired  for  the  promotion  of  its  peace  and  welfare  ; 
it  is  also  evident  that  in  no  part  of  the  world  have  they  been  fully 
observed,  and,  indeed,  in  most  countries  they  are,  to  this  day, 
grossly  trampled  upon.  A  question  then  arises,  How  far  does  it 
consist  with  Christian  submission  to  endeavour  to  remedy  the  evils 
of  a  government  ] 

On  this  difficult  and  often  controverted  point  we  must  proceed 
with  caution,  and  with  steady  respect  to  the  principles  above 
drawn  from  the  word  of  God ;  and  that  the  subject  may  be  less 
entangled,  it  may  be  proper  to  leave  out  of  our  consideration,  for 
the  present,  all  questions  relating  to  rival  supreme  powers,  as  in 
the  case  of  a  usurpation,  and  those  which  respect  the  duty  of 
subjects,  when  persecuted  by  their  government  on  account  of 
their  religion. 

Although  government  is  enjoined  by  God,  it  appears  to  be  left 
to  men  to  judge  in  what  form  its  purposes  may,  in  certain  circum- 
stances, be  most  effectually  accomplished.  No  direction  is  given 
on  this  subject  in  the  Scriptures.  The  patriarchal  or  family  govern- 
ments of  the  most  ancient  times,  were  founded  upon  nature  ;  but 
when  two  or  more  families  were  joined  under  one  head,  either  for 


310  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

mutual  defence,  or  for  aggression,  the  [government]  was  one  of 
choice,  or  it  resulted  from  a  submission  effected  by  conquest.  Here, 
in  many  cases,  a  compact  might,  and  in  some  instances  did,  come  in, 
though  differing  in  principle  from  "  the  social  compact"  of  theoreti- 
cal writers ;  and  this  affords  the  only  rational  way  of  interpreting 
that  real  social  compact  which  in  some  degree  or  other  exists  in 
all  nations.  In  all  cases  where  the  patriarchal  government  was  to 
be  raised  into  a  government  common  to  many  families,  some  con- 
siderable number  of  persons  must  have  determined  its  form,  and 
they  would  have  the  right  to  place  it  upon  such  fundamental  prin- 
ciples as  might  seem  best,  provided  that  such  principles  did  not 
interfere  with  the  duties  made  obligatory  by  God  upon  every 
sovereign  power,  and  with  the  obligations  of  the  subject  to  be 
governed  by  justice  in  mercy,  and  to  be  controlled  from  injuring 
others.  Equally  clear  would  be  the  right  of  the  community,  either 
en  masse,  or  by  their  natural  heads  or  representatives,  to  agree 
upon  a  body  of  laws,  which  should  be  the  standing  and  published 
expression  of  the  will  of  the  supreme  power,  that  so  the  sovereign 
will  on  all  main  questions  might  not  be  subject  to  constant  changes 
and  the  caprice  of  an  individual ;  and  to  oblige  the  sovereign,  as 
the  condition  of  his  office,  to  bind  himself  to  observe  these  funda- 
mental principles  and  laws  of  the  State  by  solemn  oath,  which  has 
been  the  practice  among  many  nations,  and  especially  those  of  the 
Gothic  stock.  It  follows  from  hence,  that  whilst  there  is  an  ordi- 
nation of  God  as  to  government,  prior  to  the  establishment  of  aW 
governments,  there  is  no  ordination  of  a  particular  man  or  men  to 
govern,  nor  any  investment  of  families  with  hereditary  right.  There 
is  no  such  ordination  in  Scripture,  and  we  know  that  none  takes 
place  by  particular  revelation.  God  "  setteth  up  one,  and  putteth 
down  another,1'  in  virtue  of  his  dominion  over  all  things ;  but  he 
does  this  through  men  themselves,  as  his  controlled  and  often 
unconscious  instruments.  Hence,  by  St.  Peter,  in  perfect  con- 
sistency with  St  Paul,  the  existing  governments  of  the  world  are 
called  "  ordinances  of  men." — "  Submit  to  every  ordinance  of 
man"  or  to  every  human  creation  or  constitution,  "  for  the  Lord's 
sake,  whether  to  the  king  as  supreme,"  &c.  Again,  as  the  wisdom 
to  govern  with  absolute  truth  and  justice,  is  not  to  be  presumed  to 
dwell  in  one  man,  however  virtuous,  so,  in  this  state  of  things,  the 
better  to  secure  a  salutary  administration,  there  would  be  a  right 
to  make  provision  for  this  also,  by  Councils,  Senates,  Parliaments, 
Cortes,  or  similar  institutions,  vested  with  suitable  powers,  to  for- 
ward, but  not  to  obstruct,  the  exercise  of  good  government.  And 
accordingly,  we  can  trace  the  rudiments  of  these  institutions  in  the 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  311 

earliest  stages  of  most  regular  governments.  These  and  similar 
arrangements,  are  left  to  human  care,  prudence,  and  patriotism ; 
and  they  are  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  principles  of  sovereign 
right  as  laid  down  in  Scripture. 

It  is  not,  however,  in  the  forming  of  a  new  State,  that  any  great 
difficulty  in  morals  arises.  It  comes  in  when  either  old  States, 
originally  ill  constituted,  become  inadapted  to  the  purposes  of  good 
government  in  a  new  and  altered  condition  of  society,  and  the 
supreme  power  refuses  to  adapt  itself  to  this  new  state  of  affairs  ; 
or  when,  in  States  originally  well  constituted,  encroachments  upon 
the  public  liberties  take  place,  and  great  misrule  or  neglect  is 
chargeable  upon  the  executive.  The  question  in  such  cases  is, 
whether  resistance  to  the  will  of  the  supreme  power  is  consistent 
with  the  subjects'  duty  1 

To  answer  this,  resistance  must  be  divided  into  two  kinds, — the 
resistance  of  opinion,  and  the  resistance  of  force. 

As  to  the  first,  the  lawfulness,  nay,  even  the  duty  of  it  must 
often  be  allowed ;  but  under  certain  qualifying  circumstances. 
As,  1 .  That  this  resistance  of  opposing  and  inculpating  opinion  is 
not  directed  against  government,  as  such,  however  strict,  provided 
it  be  just  and  impartial.  2.  That  it  is  not  personal  against  the 
supreme  magistrate  himself,  or  his  delegated  authorities,  but  relates 
to  public  acts  only.  3.  That  it  springs  not  from  mere  theoretical 
preference  of  some  new  form  of  government  to  that  actually  exist- 
ing, so  that  it  has  in  it  nothing  practical.  4.  That  it  proceeds  not 
from  a  hasty,  prejudiced,  or  malignant  interpretation  of  the  cha- 
racter, designs,  and  acts  of  a  government.  5.  That  it  is  not  factious  ; 
that  is,  not  the  result  of  attachment  to  parties,  and  of  zeal  to  effect 
mere  party  objects,  instead  of  the  general  good.  6.  That  it  does 
not  respect  the  interests  of  a  few  only,  or  of  a  part  of  the  commu- 
nity, or  the  mere  local  interests  of  some  places  in  opposition  to  the 
just  interests  of  other  places.  Under  such  guards  as  these,  the 
respectful,  but  firm  expression  of  opinion,  by  speech,  writing, 
petition,  or  remonstrance,  is  not  only  lawful,  but  is  often  an 
imperative  duty,  a  duty  for  which  hazards  even  must  be  run  by 
those  who  endeavour  to  lead  up  public  opinion  to  place  itself 
against  real  encroachments  upon  the  fundamental  laws  of  a  State, 
or  any  serious  maladministration  of  its  affairs.  The  same  conclu- 
sion may  be  maintained  under  similar  reserves,  when  the  object  is 
to  improve  a  deficient  and  inadequate  state  of  the  supreme  govern- 
ment. It  is  indeed  specially  requisite  here,  that  the  case  should  be 
a  clear  one ;  that  it  should  be  felt  to  be  so  by  the  great  mass  of 
those  who  with  any  propriety  can  be  called  the  public;  that  it 


312  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

should  not  be  urged  beyond  the  necessity  of  the  case  ;  that  the 
discussion  of  it  should  be  temperate  ;  that  the  change  should  be 
directly  connected  with  an  obvious  public  good,  not  otherwise  to 
be  accomplished.  When  these  circumstances  meet,  there  is  mani- 
festly no  opposition  to  government  as  an  ordinance  of  God ;  no 
blamable  resistance  "  to  the  powers  that  be,"  since  it  is  only  pro- 
posed to  place  them  in  circumstances  the  more  effectually  to  fulfil 
the  duties  of  their  office  ;  nothing  contrary,  in  fact,  to  the  original 
compact,  the  object  of  which  was  the  public  benefit,  by  rendering 
its  government  as  efficient  to  promote  the  good  of  the  State  as 
possible,  and  which  therefore  necessarily  supposed  a  liability  to 
future  modifications,  when  the  fairly  collected  public  sentiment, 
through  the  organs  by  which  it  usually  expresses  itself  as  to  the 
public  weal,  required  it.  The  least  equivocal  time,  however,  for 
proposing  any  change  in  what  might  be  regarded  as  fundamental 
or  constitutional  in  a  form  of  government  originally  ill  settled, 
would  be  on  the  demise  of  the  sovereign,  when  the  new  stipula- 
tions might  be  offered  to  his  successor,  and  very  lawfully  be 
imposed  upon  him. 

Resistance  by  force  may  be  divided  into  two  kinds.  The  first  is> 
that  milder  one  which  belongs  to  constitutional  states,  that  is,  to 
those  in  which  the  compact  between  the  supreme  power  and  the 
people  has  been  drawn  out  into  express  articles,  or  is  found  in  well 
understood  and  received  principles  and  ancient  customs,  imposing 
checks  upon  the  sovereign  will,  and  surrounding  with  guards  the 
public  liberty.  The  application  of  this  controlling  power,  which, 
in  this  country,  is  placed  in  a  Parliament,  may  have  in  it  much  of 
compulsion  and  force  ;  as  when  Parliament  rejects  measures  pro- 
posed by  the  ministry,  who  are  the  organs  of  the  will  of  the 
sovereign  ;  or  when  it  refuses  the  usual  supplies  for  the  army  and 
navy,  until  grievances  are  redressed.  The  proper  or  improper 
use  of  this  power  depends  on  the  circumstances ;  but  when  not 
employed  factiously,  nor  under  the  influence  of  private  feelings, 
nor  in  subservience  to  unjustifiable  popular  clamour,  or  to  popular 
demagogues  ;  but  advisedly  and  patriotically,  in  order  to  maintain 
the  laws  and  customs  of  the  kingdom,  there  is  in  it  no  infringement 
of  the  laws  of  Scripture  as  to  the  subjects'  obedience.  A  compact 
exists ;  these  are  the  established  means  of  enforcing  it ;  and  to 
them  the  sovereign  has  consented  in  his  coronation  oath. 

The  second  kind  is  resistance  by  force  of  arms ;  and  this  at  least 
must  be  established  before  its  lawfulness,  in  any  case,  however 
extreme,  can  be  proved,  that  it  is  so  necessary  to  remedy  some 
great  public  evil  that  milder  means  are  totally  inadequate, — a  point 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  31o 

which  can  very  seldom  be  made  out  so  clearly  as  to  satisfy  con- 
scientious men.  One  of  three  cases  must  be  supposed : — either 
that  the  nation  enjoys  good  institutions  which  it  is  enlightened 
enough  to  value : — or  that  public  liberty  and  other  civil  blessings 
are  in  gradual  progress ;  but  that  a  part  only  of  the  people  are 
interested  in  maintaining  and  advancing  them,  whilst  a  great  body 
of  ignorant,  prejudiced,  and  corrupt  persons,  are  on  the  side  oi 
the  supreme  power,  and  ready  to  lend  themselves  as  instruments 
of  its  misrule  and  despotism  : — or,  thirdly,  that  although  the 
majority  of  the  public  are  opposed  to  infringements  on  the  con- 
stitution, yet  the  sovereign,  in  attempting  to  change  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  his  compact,  employs  his  mercenary  troops 
against  his  subjects,  or  is  aided  and  abetted  by  some  foreign 
influence  or  power. 

In  the  first  case  we  have  supposed,  it  does  not  seem  possible 
for  unjust  aggressions  to  be  successful.  The  people  are  enlight- 
ened, and  attached  to  their  institutions ;  and  a  prompt  resistance 
of  public  opinion  to  the  very  first  attempt  of  the  supreme  power 
must,  in  that  case,  be  excited,  and  will  be  sufficient  to  arrest  the 
evil.  Accordingly,  we  find  no  instance  of  such  a  people  being 
bereft  of  their  liberty  by  their  rulers.  The  danger  in  that  state  o! 
society  often  lies  on  the  other  side.  For  as  there  is  a  natural 
inclination  in  men  in  power  to  extend  their  authority,  so  in  sub- 
jects there  is  a  strong  disposition  to  resist  or  evade  it ;  and  when 
the  strength  of  public  opinion  is  known  in  any  country,  there  are 
never  wanting  persons,  who,  from  vanity,  faction,  or  interest,  are 
ready  to  excite  the  passions,  and  to  corrupt  the  feelings  of  the 
populace,  and  to  render  them  suspicious  and  unruly ;  so  that  the 
difficulty  which  a  true  patriotism  will  often  have  to  contend  with, 
is,  not  to  repress  but  to  support  a  just  authority.  Licentiousness  in 
the  people  has  often,  by  a  reaction,  destroyed  liberty,  overthrowing 
the  powers  by  which  alone  it  is  supported. 

The  second  case  supposes  just  opinions  and  feelings  on  the 
necessity  of  improving  the  civil  institutions  of  a  country  to  be  in 
some  progress ;  that  the  evils  of  bad  government  are  not  only 
beginning  to  be  felt,  but  to  be  extensively  reflected  upon ;  and 
that  the  circumstances  of  a  country  are  such  that  these  considera- 
tions must  force  themselves  upon  the  public  mind,  and  advance 
the  influence  of  public  opinion  in  favour  of  beneficial  changes 
When  this  is  the  case,  the  existing  evils  must  be  gradually  coun- 
teracted, and  ultimately  subdued  by  the  natural  operation  of  all 
these  circumstances.  But  if  little  impression  has  been  made  upon 
the  public  mind,  resistance  would  be  hopeless,  and,  even  if  not 

Vol.  III.  35 


314  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

condemned  by  a  higher  principle,  impolitic.  The  elements  of 
society  are  not  capable  of  being  formed  into  a  better  system,  or, 
if  formed  into  it,  cannot  sustain  it,  since  no  form  of  government, 
however  good  in  theory,  is  reducible  to  beneficial  practice,  without 
a  considerable  degree  of  public  intelligence  and  public  virtue. 
Even  where  society  is  partially  prepared  for  beneficial  changes, 
they  may  be  hurried  on  too  rapidly,  that  is,  before  sufficient 
previous  impression  has  been  made  upon  the  public  mind  and 
character,  and  then  nothing  but  mischief  could  result  from  a 
contest  of  force  with  a  bad  government.  The  effect  would  be 
that  the  leaders  of  each  party  would  appeal  to  an  ignorant  and 
bad  populace,  and  the  issue  on  either  side  would  prove  injurious 
to  the  advancement  of  civil  improvement.  If  the  despotic  party 
should  triumph,  then,  of  course,  all  patriotism  would  be  con- 
founded with  rebellion,  and  the  efforts  of  moderate  men  to  benefit 
their  country  be  rendered  for  a  long  time  hopeless.  If  the  party 
seeking  just  reforms  should  triumph,  they  could  only  do  so  by  the 
aid  of  those  whose  bad  passions  they  had  inflamed,  as  was  the 
case  in  the  French  Revolution ;  and  then  the  result  would  be  o 
violence  which,  it  is  true,  overthrows  one  form  of  tyranny,  but 
sets  up  another  under  which  the  best  men  perish.  It  cannot  be 
doubted  but  that  the  sound  public  opinion  in, France,  independent 
of  all  the  theories  in  favour  of  republicanism  which  had  been  circu- 
lated among  a  people  previously  unprepared  for  political  discus- 
sions, was  sufficient  to  have  effected,  gradually,  the  most  beneficial 
changes  in  its  government ;  and  that  the  violence  which  was 
excited  by  blind  passions  threw  back  the  real  liberties  of  that  coun- 
try for  many  years.  The  same  effect  followed  the  parliamentary 
war,  excited  in  our  own  country  in  the  reign  of  Charles  the  First. 
The  resistance  of  arms  was  in  neither  case  to  be  justified,  and  it 
led  to  the  worst  crimes.  The  extreme  case  of  necessity  was  not 
made  out  in  either,  instance ;  and  the  duty  of  subjects  to  their 
sovereigns  was  grossly  violated. 

The  third  case  supposed  appears  to  be  the  only  one  in  which 
the  renunciation  of  allegiance  is  clearly  justifiable  ;  because  when 
the  contract  of  a  king  with  his  people  is  not  only  violated  obvi- 
ously, repeatedly,  and  in  opposition  to  petition  and  remonstrance, 
but  a  mercenary  soldiery  is  employed  against  those  whom  he  is 
bound  to  protect,  and  the  fear  of  foreign  force  and  compulsion  i< 
also  suspended  over  them  to  compel  the  surrender  of  those  rights 
which  are  accorded  to  them  both  by  the  laws  of  God,  and  the 
fundamental  laws  of  the  kingdom,  the  resistance  of  public  feeling 
and  sentiment,  and  that  of  the  constitutional  authorities,  is  no 


THIRD.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  315 

longer  available  ;  and  such  a  sovereign  does,  in  fact,  lose  his  lights 
by  a  hostile  denial  of  his  duties,  in  opposition  to  his  contract  with 
his  people.  Such  a  case  arose  in  this  country  at  the  Revolution  of 
1 688  ;  it  was  one  so  clear  and  indubitable,  as  to  carry  with  it  the 
calm  and  deliberate  sense  of  the  vast  majority  of  all  ranks  of  society ; 
and  the  whole  was  stamped  Avith  the  character  of  a  deliberate 
national  act,  not  that  of  a  faction.  This  resistance  was  doubtless 
justifiable.  It  involved  no  opposition  to  government  as  such,  but 
was  made  for  the  purpose  of  serving  the  ends  of  good  government, 
and  the  preservation  of  the  very  principles  of  the  constitution.  Nor 
did  it  imply  any  resistance  to  the  existing  power  in  any  respect  in 
which  it  was  invested  with  any  right,  either  by  the  laws  of  God,  or 
those  of  the  realm.  It  will,  however,  appear  that  here  was  a  con- 
currence of  circumstances  which  rendered  the  case  one  which  can 
very  rarely  occur.  It  was  not  the  act  of  a  few  individuals  ;  nor  of 
mere  theorists  in  forms  of  government ;  nor  was  it  the  result  of 
unfounded  jealousy  or  alarm ;  nor  was  it  the  work  of  either  the 
populace  on  the  one  hand,  or  of  an  aristocratic  faction  on  the 
other ;  bvit  of  the  people  under  their  natural  guides  and  leaders, — 
the  nobility  and  gentry  of  the  land  :  nor  were  any  private  interests 
involved,  the  sole  object  being  the  public  weal,  and  the  maintenance 
of  the  laws.  When  such  circumstances  and  principles  meet, 
similar  acts  may  be  justified ;  but  in  no  instance  of  an  equivocal 
character. 

The  question  of  a  subject's  duty  in  case  of  the  existence  of  rival 
supreme  powers,  is  generally  a  very  difficult  one,  at  least  for  some 
time.  When  the  question  of  right  which  lies  between  them  divides 
a  nation,  he  who  follows  his  conscientious  opinion  as  to  this  point 
Is  doubtless  morally  safe,  and  he  ought  to  follow  it  at  the  expense 
of  any  inconvenience.  But  when  a  power  is  settled  de  facto  in  the 
possession  of  the  government,  although  the  right  of  its  claim  should 
remain  questionable  in  the  minds  of  any,  there  appears  a  limit 
beyond  which  no  man  can  be  fairly  required  to  withhold  his  full 
allegiance.  Where  that  limit  lies  it  is  difficult  to  say,  and  individual 
conscience  must  have  considerable  latitude ;  but  perhaps*  the  general 
rule  may  be,  that  when  continued  resistance  would  be  manifestly  con- 
trary to  the  general  welfare  of  the  whole,  it  is  safe  to  conclude  that 
lie  who  changes  the  "  powers  that  be"  at  his  sovereign  pleasure, 
has  in  his  providence  permitted  or  established  a  new  order  of  things 
to  which  men  are  bound  to  conform. 

Whether  men  are  at  liberty  to  resist  their  lawful  princes  when 
persecuted  by  them  for  conscience'  sake,  is  a  question  which 
brings  in  additional  considerations ;  because  of  that  patience  and 


316  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES. 

meekness  which  Christ  has  enjoined  upon  his  followers  when  the) 
suffer  for  his  religion.  When  persecution  falls  upon  a  portion  only 
of  the  subjects  of  a  country,  it  appears  their  clear  duty  to  submit, 
rather  than  to  engage  in  plots  and  conspiracies  against  the  perse- 
cuting power ;  practices  which  never  can  consist  with  Christian 
moderation  and  truth.  But  when  it  should  fall  upon  a  people 
constituting  a  distinct  State,  though  united  politically  with  some 
other,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Waldenses,  then  the  persecution,  ii 
carried  to  the  violation  of  liberty,  life,  and  property,  would  involve 
(he  violation  of  political  rights  also,  and  so  nullify  the  compact 
which  has  guaranteed  protection  to  all  innocent  subjects.  A 
national  resistance  on  these  grounds  would,  for  the  foregoing 
reasons,  stand  on  a  very  different  basis. 

No  questions  of  this  kind  can  come  before  a  Christian  man, 
however,  without  placing  him  under  the  necessity  of  considering 
the  obligation  of  many  duties  of  a  much  clearer  character  than,  in 
almost  any  case,  the  duty  of  resistance  to  the  government  under 
which  he  lives,  can  be.  He  is  bound  to  avoid  all  intemperance 
and  uncharitableness,  and  he  is  not,  therefore,  at  liberty  to  become 
a  factious  man ;  he  is  forbidden  to  indulge  malignity,  and  is 
restrained  therefore  from  revenge;  he  is  taught  to  be  distrustful 
of  his  own  judgment,  and  must  only  admit  that  of  the  wise  and 
good  to  be  influential  with  him  ;  he  must  therefore  avoid  all  asso- 
ciation with  low  and  violent  men,  the  rabble  of  a  State,  and  their 
designing  leaders ;  he  is  bound  to  submission  to  rulers  in  all  cases 
where  a  superior  duty  cannot  be  fairly  established ;  and  he  is  warned 
of  the  danger  of  resistance  "  to  the  power,"  as  bringing  after  it 
Divine  "  condemnation,"  wherever  the  case  is  not  clear,  and  not 
Cully  within  the  principles  of  the  word  of  God.  So  circumstanced, 
ihe  allegiance  of  a  Christian  people  is  secured  to  all  governors, 
and  to  all  governments,  except  in  very  extreme  cases  which  can 
very  seldom  arise  in  the  judgment  of  any  who  respect  the  authority 
of  the  word  of  God  ;  and  thus  this  branch  of  Christian  morality  is 
established  upon  principles  which  at  once  uphold  the  majesty  of 
[governmeAt,]  and  throw  their  shield  over  the  liberties  of  the 
people  ;  principles  which  in  the  wisdom  of  God  beautifully  entwine 
[  fidelity.]  freedom,  and  peace. 


END  OF  THE   THIRD  PART, 


PART    FOURTH. 

THE  INSTITUTIONS   OF  CHRISTIANITY 


CHAPTER  I. 

The  Christian  Church. 

The  Church  of  Christ,  in  its  largest  sense,  consists  of  all  who 
have  been  baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ,  and  who  thereby  make 
a  visible  profession  of  faith  in  his  Divine  mission,  and  in  all  the 
doctrines  taught  by  him  and  his  inspired  Apostles.  In  a  stricter 
sense,  it  consists  of  those  who  are  vitally  united  to  Christ,  as  the 
members  of  the  body  to  the  head,  and  who,  being  thus  imbued 
with  spiritual  life,  walk  no  longer  "  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the 
Spirit."  Taken  in  either  view;  it  is  a  visible  society,  bound  to 
observe  the  laws  of  Christ,  its  sole  Head  and  Lord.  Visible  fel- 
lowship with  this  Church  is  the  duty  of  all  who  profess  faith  in 
Christ ;  for  in  this,  in  part,  consists  that  "  confession  of  Christ 
before  men,"  on  which  so  much  stress  is  laid  in  the  discourses  of 
our  Lord.  It  is  obligatory  on  all  who  are  convinced  of  the  truth 
of  Christianity  to  be  baptized ;  and  upon  all  thus  baptized  fre- 
quently to  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  in  order  to  testify  their 
continued  faith  in  that  great  and  distinguishing  doctrine  of  the 
religion  of  Christ,  the  redemption  of  the  world  by  the  sacrificial 
effusion  of  his  blood,  both  of  which  suppose  union  with  his  Church. 
The  ends  of  this  fellowship  or  association  are,  to  proclaim  our 
faith  in  the  doctrine  of  Christ  as  divine  in  its  origin,  and  necessarv 
to  salvation ;  to  offer  public  prayers  and  thanksgivings  to  God 
through  Christ,  as  the  sole  Mediator;  to  hear  God's  word  ex- 
plained and  enforced  ;  and  to  place  ourselves  under  that  discipline 
which  consists  in  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  of  Christ,  (which 
are  the  rules  of  the  society  called  the  Church,)  upon  the  mem- 
bers, not  merely  by  general  exhortation,  but  by  kind  oversight, 
and  personal  injunction  and  admonition  of  its  Ministers.    All  these 

35* 


'J15  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

flow  from  the  original  obligation  to  avow  our  faith  in  Christ,  and 
our  love  to  him. 

The  Church  of  Christ  being  then  a  visible  and  permanent 
society,  bound  to  observe  certain  rites,  and  to  obey  certain  rules, 
the  existence  of  government  in  it  is  necessarily  supposed.  All 
religious  rites  suppose  order,  all  order  direction  and  control. 
and  these  a  directive  and  controlling  power.  Again,  all 
laws  are  nugatory  without  enforcement,  in  the  present  mixed  and 
imperfect  state  of  society ;  and  all  enforcement  supposes  an 
executive.  If  Baptism  be  the  door  of  admission  into  the  Church, 
some  must  judge  of  the  fitness  of  candidates,  and  administrators  of 
the  rite  must  be  appointed ;  if  the  Lord's  Supper  must  be  partaken 
of,  the  times  and  the  mode  are  to  be  determined,  the  qualifications 
of  communicants  judged  of,  and  the  administration  placed  in  suit- 
able hands ;  if  worship  must  be  social  and  public,  here  again  there 
must  be  an  appointment  of  times,  an  order,  and  an  administra- 
tion ;  if  the  word  of  God  is  to  be  read  and  preached,  then  readers 
and  preachers  are  necessary ;  if  the  continuance  of  any  one  in 
the  fellowship  of  Christians  be  conditional  upon  good  conduct,  so 
that  the  purity  and  credit  of  the  Church  may  be  guarded,  then 
the  power  of  enforcing  discipline  must  be  lodged  somewhere. 
Thus  government  flows  necessarily  from  the  very  nature  of  the 
institution  of  the  Christian  Church ;  and  since  this  institution  has 
the  authority  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles,  it  is  not  to  be  supposed 
that  its  government  was  left  unprovided  for ;  and  if  they  have  in 
fact  made  such  a  provision,  it  is  no  more  a  matter  of  mere  option 
with  Christians  whether  they  will  be  subject  to  government  in  the 
Church,  than  it  is  optional  with  them  to  confess  Christ  by  becom- 
ing its  members. 

The  Nature  of  this  government,  and  the  Persons  to  whom  it  is 
committed,  are  both  points  which  we  must  briefly  examine  by  the 
light  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

As  to  the  first,  it  is  wholly  spiritual : — "  My  kingdom,"  says  our 
Lord,  "  is  not  of  this  world."  The  Church  is  a  society  founded 
upon  faith,  and  united  by  mutual  love,  for  the  personal  edification 
of  its  members  in  holiness,  and  for  the  religious  benefit  of  the 
world.  The  nature  of  its  government  is  thus  determined ; — it  is 
concerned  only  with  spiritual  objects.  It  cannot  employ  force  to 
compel  men  into  its  pale  ;  for  the  only  door  of  the  Church  is  faith, 
to  which  there  can  be  no  compulsion, — :"  he  that  belicveth  and  is 
baptized"  becomes  a  member.  It  cannot  inflict  pains  and  penal- 
lies  upon  the  disobedient  and  refractory,  like  civil  governments ; 
for  the  only  punitive  discipline  authorized  in  the  New  Testament, 


tOUHTH.j  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  319 

is  comprised  in  "admonition,"  "reproof,"  " sharp  rebukes,"  and, 
iinally,  "  excision  from  the  society."  The  last  will  be  better  under- 
stood if  we  consider  the  special  relations  in  which  true  Christians 
stand  to  each  other,  and  the  duties  resulting  from  them.  They  are 
members  of  one  body,  and  are  therefore  bound  to  tenderness  and 
sympathy ;  they  are  the  conjoint  instructers  of  others,  and  are 
therefore  to  strive  to  be  of  "  one  judgment ;"  they  are  brethren, 
and  they  are  to  love  one  another  as  such,  that  is,  with  an  affection 
more  special  than  that  general  good  will  which  they  are  com- 
manded to  bear  to  all  mankind  ;  they  are  therefore  to  seek  the 
intimacy  of  friendly  society  among  themselves,  and,  except  in  the 
ordinary  and  courteous  intercourse  of  life,  they  are  bound  to  keep 
themselves  separate  from  the  world  ;  they  are  enjoined  to  do  good 
unto  all  men,  but  "  specially  to  them  that  are  of  the  household  oi 
faith ;"  and  they  are  forbidden  "  to  eat"  at  the  Lord's  Table  with 
immoral  persons,  that  is,  with  those  who,  although  they  continue 
their  Christian  profession,  dishonour  it  by  their  practice.  With 
these  relations  of  Christians  to  each  other  and  to  the  world,  and 
their  correspondent  duties  before  our  minds,  we  may  easily  inter- 
pret the  nature  of  that  extreme  discipline  which  is  vested  in  the 
Church.  "  Persons  who  will  not  hear  the  Church"  are  to  be  held 
"  as  heathen  men  and  publicans,"  as  those  who  are  not  members 
of  it ;  that  is,  they  are  to  be  separated  from  it,  and  regarded  as  oi 
"  the  world,"  quite  out  of  the  range  of  the  above-mentioned  rela- 
tions of  Christians  to  each  other,  and  their  correspondent  duties ; 
but  still,  like  "heathen  men  and  publicans,"  they  are  to  be  the 
objects  of  pity,  and  general  benevolence.  Nor  is  this  extreme  dis- 
cipline to  be  hastily  inflicted  before  "a  first  and  second  admonition,"' 
nor  before  those  who  are  "  spiritual"  have  attempted  "  to  restore  a 
brother  overtaken  by  a  fault;"  and  when  the  "wicked  person" 
is  "  put  away,"  still  the  door  is  to  be  kept  open  for  his  reception 
again  upon  repentance.  The  true  excommunication  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  is  therefore  a  merciful  and  considerate  separation  ol 
an  incorrigible  offender  from  the  body  of  Christians,  without  any 
infliction  of  civil  pains  or  penalties.  "  Now  we  commanr?  you, 
brethren,  in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  ye  withdraw 
yourselves  from  every  brother  that  walketh  disorderly,  and  not 
after  the  tradition  which  ye  have  received  from  us,"  2  Thess.  iii,  6. 
•'  Purge  out  therefore  the  old  leaven,  that  ye  may  be  a  new  lump," 
1  Cor.  v,  5.  "  But  now  I  have  written  to  you  not  to  keep  com- 
pany, if  any  man  that  is  called  a  brother  be  a  fornicator,  or  covet- 
ous, or  an  idolater,  or  a  railer,  or  a  drunkard,  or  an  extortioner, 
with  such  a  one,  no  not  to  eat,"  1  Cor.  v,  11.     This  then  is  the 


320  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

moral  discipline  which  is  imperative  upon  the  Church  of  Christ, 
and  its  government  is  criminally  defective  whenever  it  is  not 
enforced.  On  the  other  hand,  the  disabilities  and  penalties  which 
established  Churches  in  different  places  have  connected  with  these 
sentences  of  excommunication,  have  no  countenance  at  all  in 
Scripture,  and  are  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  spiritual  character 
and  ends  of  the  Christian  association. 

As  to  the  second  point, — the  persons  to  whom  the  government 
of  the  Church  is  committed,  it  is  necessary  to  consider  the  com- 
position, so  to  speak,  of  the  primitive  Church,  as  stated  in  the 
New  Testament. 

A  full  enunciation  of  these  offices  we  find  in  Ephesians  iv,  1 1  : 
•;  And  he  gave  some,  Apostles;  and  some,  Prophets;  and  some, 
Evangelists ;  and  some,  Pastors  and  Teachers ;  for  the  perfecting 
of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  ministry,  for  the  edifying  of  the 
body  of  Christ."  Of  these,  the  office  of  Apostle  is  allowed  by  all 
to  have  been  confined  to  those  immediately  commissioned  by 
Christ  to  witness  the  fact  of  his  miracles  and  of  his  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  and  to  repeal  the  complete  system  of  Christian 
doctrine  and  duty ;  confirming  their  extraordinary  mission  by 
miracles  wrought  by  themselves.  If  by  "  Prophets"  we  are  to 
understand  persons  who  foretold  future  events,  then  the  office  was 
from  its  very  nature  extraordinary,  and  the  gift  of  prophecy  has 
passed  away  with  the  other  miraculous  endowments  of  the  first 
age  of  Christianity.  If,  with  others,  we  understand  that  these 
Prophets  were  extraordinary  teachers  raised  up  until  the  churches 
were  settled  under  permanent  qualified  instructers ;  still  the  office 
was  temporary.  The  "  Evangelists"  are  generally  understood  to 
be  assistants  of  the  Apostles,  who  acted  under  their  especial  au- 
thority and  direction.  Of  this  number  were  Timothy  and  Titus  : 
and  as  the  Apostle  Paul  directed  them  to  ordain  Bishops  or 
Presbyters  in  the  several  Churches,  but  gave  them  no  authority 
to  ordain  successors  to  themselves  in  their  particular  office  as 
Evangelists,  it  is  clear  that  the  Evangelists  must  also  be  reckoned 
among  the  number  of  extraordinary  and  temporary  Ministers  suited 
to  the  first  age  of  Christianity.  Whether  by  "  Pastors  and  Teach- 
ers" two  offices  be  meant,  or  one,  has  been  disputed.  The  change 
in  the  mode  of  expression  seems  to  favour  the  latter  view,  and  so 
the  text  is  interpreted  by  St.  Jerome,  and  St.  Augustine  ;  but  the 
point  is  of  little  consequence.  A  Pastor  was  a  Teacher ;  although 
every  Teacher  might  not  be  a  Pastor ;  but  in  many  cases  be  con- 
lined  to  the  office  of  subordinate  instruction,  whether  as  an  expounder 
of  doctrine,  a  catechisr,  or  even  a  more  private  instructer  of  those 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  321 

who  as  yet  were  unacquainted  with  the  first  principles  of  the  gospel 
of  Christ.  The  term  Pastor  implies  the  duties  both  of  instruction 
and  of  government,  of  feeding  and  of  ruling  the  flock  of  Christ ; 
and,  as  the  Presbyters  or  Bishops  were  ordained  in  the  several 
churches,  both  by  the  Apostles  and.  Evangelists,  and  rules  are 
left  by  St.  Paul  as  to  their  appointment,  there  can  be  no  doubt 
but  that  these  are  the  "  Pastors"  spoken  of  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Ephcsians,  and  that  they  were  designed  to  be  the  permanent  Minis- 
ters of  the  Church ;  and  that  with  them  both  the  government  ol 
the  Church  and  the  performance  of  its  leading  religious  services 
were  deposited.  Deacons  had  the  charge  of  the  gifts  and  offerings 
for  charitable  purposes,  although,  as  appears  from  Justin  Martyr, 
uot  in  every  instance ;  for  he  speaks  of  the  weekly  oblations  as 
being  deposited  with  the  chief  Minister,  and  distributed  by  him. 

Whether  Bishops  and  Presbyters  be  designations  of  the  same 
office,  or  these  appellatives  express  two  distinct  sacred  orders,  is  a 
subject  which  has  been  controverted  by  Episcopalians  and  Pres- 
byterians with  much  warmth  ;  and  whoever  would  fully  enter  into 
their  arguments  from  Scripture  and  antiquity,  must  be  referred  to 
this  controversy,  which  is  too  large  to  be  here  more  than  glanced 
at.  The  argument  drawn  by  the  Presbyterians  from  the  promis- 
cuous use  of  these  terms  in  the  New  Testament,  to  prove  that  the 
same  order  of  Ministers  is  expressed  by  them,  appears  incontro- 
vertible. When  St.  Paul,  for  instance,  sends  for  the  "  Elders,"  or 
Presbyters,  of  the  Church  of  Ephesus  to  meet  him  at  Miletus,  he 
thus  charges  them,  "  Take  heed  to  yourselves,  and  to  all  the  flock, 
over  the  which  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  made  you  Overseers,"  or 
Bishops.  That  here  the  Elders  or  Presbyters  are  called  "Bishops,'* 
cannot  be  denied,  and  the  very  office  assigned  to  them,  to  "feed 
the  Church  of  God,"  and  the  injunction,  to  "  take  heed  to  the 
flock,"  show  that  the  office  of  Elder  or  Presbyter  is  the  same  as 
that  of  "  Pastor"  in  the  passage  just  quoted  from  the  Epistle  to 
the  Ephesians.  St.  Paul  directs  Titus  to  "ordain  Elders  (Pres- 
byters) in  every  city,"  and  then  adds,  as  a  directory  of  ordination, 
"  a-  Bishop  must  be  blameless,"  &c,  plainly  marking  the  same 
office  by  these  two  convertible  appellations.  "  Bishops  and  Dea- 
cons" are  the  only  classes  of  Ministers  addressed  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Philippians  ;  and  if  the  Presbyters  were  not  understood  to  be 
included  under  the  term  "  Bishops,"  the  omission  of  any  notice  ol 
this  order  of  Ministers  is  not  to  be  accounted  for.  As  the  Apos- 
tles, when  not  engaged  in  their  own  extraordinary  vocation,  appear 
to  have  filled  the  office  of  stated  Ministers  in  *hose  Churches  in 
which  they  occasionally  resided  for  considerable  periods  of  time. 


o22  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

they  sometimes  called  themselves  Presbyters.  "  The  Elder," 
Presbyter,  "unto  the  elect  lady,"  2  John  i,  1.  "The  Elders 
(Presbyters)  which  are  among  you,  I  exhort,  who  am  also  an 
Elder,"  (Presbyter,)  and  from  what  follows,  the  highest  offices  of 
teaching  and  government  in- the  Church  are  represented  as  vested 
in  the  Presbyters.  "  Feed  the  flock  of  God,  which  is  among  you., 
taking  the  oversight  thereof."  There  seems,  therefore,  to  be  the 
most  conclusive  evidence,  from  the  New  Testament,  that,  after 
the  extraordinary  ministry  vested  in  Apostles,  Prophets,  and  Evan- 
gelists,  as  mentioned  by  St.  Paul,  had  ceased,  the  feeding  and 
oversight,  that  is,  the  teaching  and  government  of  the  Churches, 
devolved  upon  an  order  of  men  indiscriminately  called  "  Pastors," 
i;  Presbyters,"  and  "Bishops,"  the  two  latter  names  growing  into 
most  frequent  use  ;  and  with  this  the  testimony  of  the  Apostolical 
Fathers,  so  far  as  their  writings  are  acknowledged  to  be  free  from 
later  interpolations,  agrees. 

It  is  not  indeed  to  be  doubted,  that,  at  a  very  early  period,  in 
some  instances  probably  from  the  time  of  the  Apostles  themselves. 
a  distinction  arose  between  Bishops  and  Presbyters  ;  and  the 
whole  strength  of  the  cause  of  the  Episcopalians  lies  in  this  fact. 
Still  this  gives  not  the  least  sanction  to  the  notion  of  Bishops  being 
a  superior  order  of  Ministers  to  Presbyters,  invested,  in  virtue  oi 
that  order,  and  by  divine  right,  with  powers  of  government  both 
over  Presbyters  and  people,  and  possessing  exclusively  the  authority 
of  ordaining  to  the  sacred  offices  of  the  Church.  As  little  too  will 
that  ancient  distinction  be  found  to  prove  any  thing  in  favour  oi 
diocesan  Episcopacy,  which  is  of  still  later  introduction. 

Could  it  be  made  clear  that  the  power  of  ordaining  to  the  Minis- 
try  was  given  to  Bishops  to  the  exclusion  of  Presbyters,  that  would 
indeed  go  far  to  prove  the  former  a  distinct  and  superior  order  oi 
Ministers  in  their  original  appointment.  But  there  is  no  passage 
in  the  New  Testament  which  gives  this  power  at  all  to  Bishops, 
as  thus  distinguished  from  Presbyters ;  whilst  all  the  examples  oi 
ordination  which  it  exhibits  are  confined  to  Apostles,  to  Evan- 
gelists, or  to  Presbyters,  in  conjunction  with  them.  St.  Paul,  in 
2  Timothy  i,  6,  says,  "Wherefore  I  put  thee  in  remembrance, 
(hat  thou  stir  up  the  gift  of  God  which  is  in  thee,  by  the  putting 
on  of  my  hands  ;"  but  in  1  Timothy  iv,  14,  he  says,  "Neglect  not 
the  gift  that  is  in  thee,  which  was  given  thee  by  prophecy,  with  the 
laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery ;"  which  two  passages, 
referring,  as  they  plainly  do,  to  the  same  event,  the  setting  apart 
of  Timothy  for  the  ministry,  show  that  the  Presbytery  were  asso- 
ciated with  St.  Paul  in  the  office  of  ordination,  and  further  provt 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  o2o 

that  the  exclusive  assumption  of  this  power,  as  by  divine  right,  b\ 
Bishops,  is  an  aggression  upon  the  rights  of  Presbyters,  for  which 
uot  only  can  no  scriptural  authority  be  pleaded,  but  which  is  in 
direct  opposition  to  it. 

The  early  distinction  made  between  Bishops  and  Presbyters  ma\ 
be  easily  accounted  for,  without  allowing  this  assumed  distinction 
of  order.  In  some  of  the  Churches  mentioned  in  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  the  Apostles  ordained  several  Elders  or  Presbyters, 
partly  to  supply  the  present  need,  and  to  provide  for  the  future 
increase  of  believers,  as  it  is  observed  by  Clemens  in  his  Epistle- 
Another  reason  would  also  urge  this : — Before  the  building  of  spa- 
cious edifices  for  the  assemblies  of  the  Christians  living  in  one  pity, 
and  in  its  neighbourhood,  in  common,  their  meetings  for  public- 
worship  must  necessarily  have  been  held  in  different  houses  ov 
rooms  obtained  for  the  purpose  ;  and  to  each  assembly  an  Elder 
would  be  requisite  for  the  performance  of  worship.  That  these 
Elders  or  Presbyters  had  the  power  of  government  in  the  Churches 
cannot  be  denied,  because  it  is  expressly  assigned  to  them  in  Scrip- 
ture. It  was  inherent  in  their  pastoral  office  ;  and  "  the  Elders 
that  rule  well,"  were  to  be  "  counted  worthy  of  double  honour." 
A  number  of  Elders,  therefore,  being  ordained  by  the  Apostles  to 
one  Church,  gave  rise  to  the  catus  prcsbyterorum,  in  which  assem- 
bly the  affairs  of  the  Church  were  attended  to,  and  measures  taken 
for  the  spread  of  the  Gospel,  by  the  aid  of  the  common  counsel 
and  efforts  of  the  whole.  This  meeting  of  Presbyters  would  natu- 
rally lead  to  the  appointment,  whether  by  seniority  or  by  election, 
of  one  to  preside  over  the  proceedings  of  this  assembly  for  the  sake 
of  order ;  and  to  him  was  given  the  title  of  Jlngel  of  the  Church, 
and  Bishop  by  way  of  eminence.  The  latter  title  came  in  time  to 
be  exclusively  used  of  the  presiding  Elder,  because  of  that  special 
oversight  imposed  upon  him  by  his  office,  and  which,  as  Churches 
were  raised  up  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  larger  cities,  would 
also  naturally  be  extended  over  them.  Independently  of  his  fellow 
Presbyters,  however,  he  did  nothing. 

The  whole  of  this  arrangement  shows,  that  in  those  particulars  in 
which  they  were  left  free  by  the  Scriptures,  the  primitive  Christians 
adopted  that  arrangement  for  the  government  of  the  Church  which 
promised  to  render  it'  most  efficient  for  the  maintenance  of  truth 
and  piety  ;  but  they  did  not  at  this  early  period  set  up  that  unserip 
tural  distinction  of  order  between  Bishops  and  Presbyters,  which 
obtained  afterwards.  Hence  Jerome,  even  in  the  fourth  century, 
contends  against  this  doctrine,  and  says,  that  before  there  were 
parties  in  religion,  Churches  were  governed  communi  consilio  pres- 


324  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

bytcrorum;  but  that  afterwards,  it  became  a  universal  practice, 
founded  upon  experience  of  its  expediency,  that  one  of  the  Presby- 
ters should  be  chosen  by  the  rest  to  be  the  head,  and  that  the  care 
of  the  Church  should  be  committed  to  him.  He  therefore  exhorts 
Presbyters  to  remember  that  they  are  subject  by  the  custom  of  the 
Church  to  him  that  presides  over  them  ;  and  reminds  Bishops  that 
they  are  greater  than  Presbyters,  rather  by  custom  than  by  the 
appointment  of  the  Lord;  and  that  the  Church  ought  still  to  be 
governed  in  common.  The  testimony  of  antiquity  also  shows, 
that,  after  Episcopacy  had  very  greatly  advanced  its  claims,  the 
Presbyters  continued  to  be  associated  with  the  Bishop  in  the  man- 
agement of  the  affairs  of  the  Church. 

Much  light  is  thrown  upon  the  constitution  of  the  primitive 
Churches,  by  recollecting  that  they  were  formed  very  much  upon 
the  model  of  the  Jewish  synagogues.  We  have  already  seen  that 
the  mode  of  public  worship  in  the  primitive  Church  was  taken 
from  the  synagogue  service,  and  so  also  was  its  arrangement  of 
offices.  Each  synagogue  had  its  Rulers,  Elders,  or  Presbyters,  of 
whom  one  was  the  Angel  of  the  Church,  or  Minister  of  the  Syna- 
gogue, who  superintended  the  public  service  ;  directed  those  that 
read  the  Scriptures,  and  offered  up  the  prayers,  and  blessed  the 
people.  The  president  of  the  council  of  Elders  or  Rulers  was 
called,  by  way  of  eminence,  the  "  Ruler  of  the  Synagogue  ;"  and 
in  some  places,  as  Acts  xiii,  15,  we  read  of  these  "Rulers"  in  the 
plural  number ;  a  sufficient  proof  that  one  was  not  elevated  in 
order  above  the  rest.  The  Angel  of  the  Church,  and  the  Minister 
of  the  Synagogue,  might  be  the  same  as  he  who  was  invested  with 
the  office  of  President ;  or  these  offices  might  be  held  by  others 
of  the  Elders.  Lightfoot,  indeed,  states  that  the  Rulers  in  each 
synagogue  were  three,  whilst  the  Presbyters  or  Elders  were  ten. 
To  this  council  of  grave  and  wise  men,  the  affairs  of  the  syna- 
gogue, both  as  to  worship  and  discipline,  were  committed.  In  the 
synagogue  they  sat  by  themselves  in  a  semicircle,  and  the  people 
before  them,  face  to  face.  This  was  the  precise  form  in  which 
the  Bishop  and  Presbyters  used  to  sit  in  the  primitive  Churches. 
The  description  of  the  worship  of  the  synagogue  by  a  Jewish 
Rabbi,  and  that  of  the  primitive  Church  by  early  Christian  writers, 
presents  an  obvious  correspondence.  "  The  Elders,"  says  Maimo 
nides,  "  sit  with  their  faces  towards  the  people,  and  their  backs  to 
the  place  where  the  law  is  deposited ;  and  all  the  people  sit  rank 
before  rank  ;  so  the  faces  of  all  the  people  are  towards  the  sanc- 
tuary, and  towards  the  Elders ;  and  when  the  Minister  of  the  sanc- 
tuary standeth  up  to  prayer,  he  standeth  with  his  face  towards  thr 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  325 

sanctuary,  as  do  the  rest  of  the  people."  In  the  same  order  the 
first  Christians  sat  with  their  faces  towards  the  Bishops  and  Pres- 
byters, first  to  hear  the  Scriptures  read  by  the  proper  Reader  ; 
"  then,"  says  Justin  Martyr,  "  the  Reader  sitting  down,  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  assembly  stands  up  and  makes  a  sermon  of  instruction 
and  exhortation ;  after  this  is  ended,  we  all  stand  up  to  prayers ; 
prayers  being  ended,  the  bread,  wine,  and  water  are  all  brought 
forth  ;  then  the  President  again  praying  and  praising  to  his  utmost 
ability,  the  people  testify  their  consent  by  saying,  Amen."(8) 
"  Here  we  have  the  Scriptures  read  by  one  appointed  for  that  pur- 
pose, as  in  the  synagogue  ;  after  which  follows  the  word  of  exhort- 
ation by  the  President  of  the  assembly,  who  answers  to  the  Minister 
of  the  synagogue  ;  after  this,  public  prayers  are  performed  by  the 
same  person ;  then  the  solemn  acclamation  of  Amen  by  the  people, 
which  was  the  undoubted  practice  of  the  synagogue." (9)  Ordina- 
tion of  Presbyters  or  Elders  is  also  from  the  Jews.  Their  Priests 
were  not  ordained,  but  succeeded  to  their  office  by  birth ;  but  the 
Rulers  and  Elders  of  the  synagogue  received  ordination  by  impo- 
sition of  hands  and  prayer. 

Such  was  the  model  which  the  Apostles  followed  in  providing 
for  the  future  regulation  of  the  Churches  they  had  raised  up.  They 
took  it,  not  from  the  temple  and  its  Priesthood ;  for  that  was  typical, 
and  was  then  passing  away.  But  they  found  in  the  institution  of 
synagogues  a  plan  admirably  adapted  to  the  simplicity  and  purity 
of  Christianity,  one  to  which  some  of  the  first  converts  in  most 
places  were  accustomed,  and  which  was  capable  of  being  applied 
to  the  new  dispensation  without  danger  of  Judaizing.  It  secured 
the  assembling  of  the  people  on  the  Sabbath,  the  reading  of  the 
Scriptures,  the  preaching  of  sermons,  and  the  offering  of  public 
prayer  and  thanksgiving.  It  provided  too  for  the  government  of 
the  Church  by  a  Council  of  Presbyters,  ordained  solemnly  to  their 
office  by  imposition  of  hands  and  prayer ;  and  it  allowed  of  that 
presidency  of  one  Presbyter  chosen  by  the  others,  which  was  use- 
ful for  order  and  for  unity,  and  by  which  age,  piety,  and  gifts,  might 
preserve  their  proper  influence  in  the  Church.  The  advance  from 
this  state  of  scriptural  Episcopacy  to  Episcopacy  under  another 
form  was  the  work  of  a  later  age. 

When  the  Gospel  made  its  way  into  to  urns  and  villages,  the  con- 
cerns of  the  Christians  in  these  places  naturally  fell  under  the  cog- 
nizance and  direction  of  the  Bishops  of  the  neighbouring  cities. 
Thus  diocesses  were  gradually  formed,  comprehending  districts 
of  country,  of  different  extent.  These  diocesses  were  originally 
(8)  JpoL  2.  (9)  Stillingfleet'3  Irenicwn. 

Vol.  IN.  36 


326  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

called  rfapoixiai,  parishes,  and  the  word  Sim-ridg,  diocess,  was  not 
used  in  its  modern  sense  till  at  least  the  fourth  century ;  and  when 
we  find  Ignatius  describing  it  as  the  duty  of  a  Bishop,  "  to  speak 
to  each  member  of  the  Church  separately,  to  seek  out  all  by  name, 
even  the  slaves  of  both  sexes,  and  to  advise  every  one  of  the  flock 
in  the  affair  of  marriage,"  diocesses,  as  one  observes,  must  have 
been  very  limited,  or  the  labour  inconceivably  great. 

"As  Christianity  increased  and  overspread  all  parts,  and  espe- 
cially the  cities  of  the  empire,  it  was  found  necessary  yet  farther 
to  enlarge  the  Episcopal  office ;  and  as  there  was  commonly  a 
Bishop  in  every  great  city,  so  in  the  metropolis,  (as  the  Romans 
called  it,)  the  mother  city  of  every  province,  (wherein  they  had 
courts  of  civil  judicature,)  there  was  an  Archbishop  or  a  Metro- 
politan, who  had  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  over  all  the  Churches 
within  that  province.  He  was  superior  to  all  the  Bishops  within 
those  limits ;  to  him  it  belonged  to  ordain  or  to  ratify  the  elections 
and  ordinations  of  all  the  Bishops  within  his  province,  insomuch 
that  without  his  confirmation  they  were  looked  upon  as  null  and 
void.  Once  at  least  every  year  he  was  to  summon  the  Bishops 
under  him  to  a  Synod,  to  inquire  into  and  direct  the  ecclesiastical 
affairs  within  that  province ;  to  inspect  the  lives  and  manners,  the 
opinions  and  principles  of  his  Bishops  ;  to  admonish,  reprove,  and 
suspend  them  that  were  disorderly  and  irregular ;  if  any  controver- 
sies or  contentions  happened  between  any  of  them,  he  was  to  have 
the  hearing  and  determination  of  them ;  and  indeed  no  matter  of 
moment  was  done  within  the  whole  province,  without  first  consulting 
him  in  the  case.  When  this  office  of  Metropolitan  first  began,  I 
find  not  i  only  this  we  are  sure  of,  that  the  Council  of  JW'cc,  set- 
tling the  just  rights  and  privileges  of  Metropolitan  Bishops,  speaks 
of  them  as  a  thing  of  ancient  date,  ushering  in  the  canon  with  an 
ap^aia  z&y\  xpa7eirw,  Let  ancient  customs  still  take  place.  The  original 
of  the  institution  seems  to  have  been  partly  to  comply  with  the 
people's  occasions,  who  oft  resorted  to  the  metropolis  for  despatch 
of  their  affairs,  and  so  might  fitly  discharge  their  civil  and  ecclesias- 
tical both  at  once  ;  and  partly  because  of  the  great  confluence  of 
people  to  that  city :  that  the  Bishop  of  it  might  have  pre-eminence 
above  the  rest,  and  the  honour  of  the  Church  bear  some  proportion 
to  that  of  the  State. 

"After  this  sprung  up  another  branch  of  the  Episcopal  office,  as 
much  superior  to  that  of  Metropolitans,  as  theirs  was  to  ordinary 
Bishops ;  these  were  called  Primates  and  Patriarchs,  and  had 
jurisdiction  over  many  provinces.  For  the  understanding  of  this, 
it  is  necessary  to  know,  that,  when  Christianity  came  to  be  fully 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  327 

settled  in  the  world,  they  contrived  to  model  the  external  govern- 
ment of  the  Church,  as  near  as  might  be,  to  the  civil  government 
of  the  Roman  empire  ;  the  parallel  is  most  exactly  drawn  by  an 
ingenious  person  of  our  own  nation  ;  the  sum  of  it  is  this  : — The 
whole  empire  of  Rome  was  divided  into  thirteen  diocesses,  (so  they 
called  those  divisions,)  these  contained  about  one  hundred  and  twenty 
provinces,  and  every  province  several  cities.  Now,  as  in  every  city 
there  was  a  temporal  Magistrate  for  the  executing  of  justice,  and 
keeping  the  peace,  both  for  that  city,  and  the  towns  round  about 
it ;  so  was  there  also  a  Bishop  for  spiritual  order  and  government, 
whose  jurisdiction  was  of  like  extent  and  latitude.  In  every  pro- 
vince there  was  a  Proconsul  or  President,  whose  seat  was  usually 
at  the  metropolis,  or  chief  city  of  the  province  ;  and  hither  all 
inferior  cities  came  for  judgment  in  matters  of  importance.  And 
in  proportion  to  this  there  was  in  the  same  city  an  Archbishop  or 
Metropolitan,  for  matters  of  ecclesiastical  concernment.  Lastly, 
in  every  diocess  the  Emperors  had  their  Vicarii  or  Lieutenants,  who 
dwelt  in  the  principal  city  of  the  diocess,  where  all  imperial  edicts 
were  published,  and  from  whence  they  were  sent  abroad  into  the 
several  provinces,  and  where  was  the  chief  tribunal  where  all  causes 
not  determinable  elsewhere,  were  decided.  And,  to  answer  this, 
there  was  in  the  same  city  a  Primate,  to  whom  the  last  determina- 
tion of  all  appeals  from  all  the  provinces  in  differences  of  the  Clergy, 
and  the  sovereign  care  of  all  the  diocess  for  sundry  points  of  spi- 
ritual government,  did  belong.  This,  in  short,  is  the  sum  of  the 
account  which  that  learned  man  gives  of  this  matter.  So  that  the 
Patriarch,  as  superior  to  the  Metropolitans,  was  to  have  under  his 
jurisdiction  not  any  one  single  province,  but  a  whole  diocess,  (in 
the  old  Roman  notion  of  that  word,)  consisting  of  many  provinces. 
To  him  belonged  the  ordination  of  all  the  Metropolitans  that  were 
under  him,  as  also  the  summoning  them  to  Councils,  the  correcting 
and  reforming  the  misdemeanors  they  were  guilty  of;  and  from  his 
judgment  and  sentence,  in  things  properly  within  his  cognizance, 
there  lay  no  appeal.  To  this  I  shall  only  add  what  Salmasius  has 
noted,  that  as  the  diocess  that  was  governed  by  the  Vicarius  had 
many  provinces  under  it,  so  the  Praifectus  Prcetorio  had  several 
diocesses  under  him :  and  in  proportion  to  this,  probable  it  was,  that 
Patriarchs  were  first  brought  in,  who,  if  not  superior  to  Primates 
in  jurisdiction  and  power,  were  yet  in  honour,  by  reason  of  the 
dignity  of  those  cities  where  their  Sees  were  fixed,  as  at  Rome, 
Constantinople,  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Jerusalem." (I) 

(1)  Cave's  Primitive  Christianity. 


328  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

Thus  diocesan  Bishops,  Metropolitans,  Primates,  Patriarchs, 
and  finally  the  Pope,  came  in,  which  offices  are  considered  as  cor- 
ruptions or  improvements ;  as  dictated  by  the  necessities  of  the 
Church,  or  as  instances  of  worldly  ambition ;  as  of  Divine  right, 
or  from  Satan ;  according  to  the  different  views  of  those  who  have 
written  on  such  subjects.  As  to  them  all  it  may,  however,  be 
said,  that,  so  far  as  they  are  pleaded  for  as  of  Divine  right,  they 
have  no  support  from  the  New  Testament ;  and  if  they  are  placed 
upon  the  only  ground  on  which  they  can  be  reasonably  discussed, 
that  of  necessity  and  good  polity,  they  must  be  tried  by  circum- 
stances, and  their  claims  of  authority  be  so  defined  that  it  may  be 
known  how  far  they  are  compatible  with  those  principles  with 
which  the  New  Testament  abounds,  although  it  contains  no  formal 
plan  of  Church  government.  The  only  scriptural  objection  to 
Episcopacy,  as  it  is  understood  in  modern  times,  is  its  assumption 
of  superiority  of  order,  of  an  exclusive  right  to  govern  the  Pastors 
as  well  as  the  flock,  and  to  ordain  to  the  Christian  Ministry.  These 
exclusive  powers  are  by  the  New  Testament  no  where  granted  to 
Bishops  in  distinction  from  Presbyters.  The  government  of  Pas- 
tors as  well  as  people,  was  at  first  in  the  assembly  of  Presbyters, 
who  were  individually  accountable  to  that  ruling  body,  and  that 
whether  they  had  a  president  or  not.  So  also  as  to  ordination  ; 
it  was  a  right  in  each,  although  used  by  several  together,  for  better 
security ;  and  even  when  the  presence  of  a  Bishop  came  to  be 
thought  necessary  to  the  validity  of  ordination,  the  Presbyters 
were  not  excluded. 

As  for  the  argument  from  the  succession  of  Bishops  from  the 
times  of  the  Apostles,  could  the  fact  be  made  out  it  would  only- 
trace  diocesan  Bishops  to  the  Bishops  of  parishes ;  those,  to  the 
Bishops  of  single  churches ;  and  Bishops  of  a  supposed  superior 
order,  to  Bishops  who  never  thought  themselves  more  than  pre- 
siding Presbyters,  primi  inter  pares.  This  therefore  would  only 
show  that  an  unscriptural  assumption  of  distinct  orders  has  been 
made,  which  that  succession,  if  established,  would  refute.  But  the 
succession  itself  is  imaginary.  Even  Epiphanius,  a  Bishop  of  the 
fourth  century,  gives  this  account  of  things,  "  that  the  Apostles 
were  not  able  to  settle  all  things  at  once.  But  according  to  the 
number  of  believers,  and  the  qualifications  for  the  different  offices 
which  those  whom  they  found  appeared  to  possess,  they  appointed 
in  some  places  only  a  Bishop  and  Deacons ;  in  others  Presbyters 
and  Deacons ;  in  others  a  Bishop,  Presbyters,  and  Deacons :" — 
a  statement  fatal  to  the  argument  from  succession.  As  for  the 
pretended  catalogues  of  Bishops  of  the  different  Churches  from  the 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  329 

days  of  the  Apostles,  exhibited  by  some  ecclesiastical  writers,  they 
are  filled  up  by  forgeries  and  inventions  of  later  times.  Eusebius, 
more  honest,  begins  his  catalogue  with  declaring,  that  it  is  not  easy 
to  say  who  were  the  disciples  of  the  Apostles  that  were  appointed 
to  feed  the  Churches  which  they  planted,  excepting  only  those, 
whom  we  read  of  in  the  writings  of  St.  Paul. 

Whether  Episcopacy  may  not  be  a  matter  of  prudential  regu- 
lation, is  another  question.  We  think  it  often  may ;  and  that 
Churches  are  quite  at  liberty  to  adopt  this  mode,  provided  they 
maintain  St.  Jerome's  distinction,  that  "  Bishops  are  greater  than 
Presbyters  rather  by  custom  than  by  appointment  of  the  Lord, 
and  that  still  the  Church  ought  to  be  governed  in  common,"  that 
is,  by  Bishops  and  Presbyters  united.  It  was  on  this  ground  that 
Luther  placed  Episcopacy, — as  useful,  though  not  of  Divine  right ; 
it  was  by  admitting  this  liberty  in  Churches,  that  Calvin  and  other 
Divines  of  the  Reformed  Churches  allowed  Episcopacy  and  dioce- 
san Churches  to  be  lawful,  there  being  nothing  to  forbid  such  an 
arrangement  in  Scripture,  when  placed  on  the  principle  of  expe- 
diency. Some  Divines  of  the  English  Church  have  chosen  to  defend 
its  Episcopacy  wholly  upon  this  ground,  as  alone  tenable ;  and, 
admitting  that  it  is  safest  to  approach  as  near  as  possible  to  primi- 
tive practice,  have  proposed  the  restoration  of  Presbyters  as  a 
senate  to  the  Bishop,  the  contraction  of  diocesses,  the  placing  of 
Bishops  in  all  great  towns,  and  the  holding  of  provincial  Synods  ; — 
thus  raising  the  Presbyters  to  their  original  rank,  as  the  Bishop's 
"  compresbyters,"  as  Cyprian  himself  calls  them,  both  in  government 
and  in  ordinations. 

As  to  that  kind  of  Episcopacy  which  trenches  upon  no  scriptural 
principle,  much  depends  upon  circumstances,  and  the  forms  in 
which  Christian  Churches  exist.  When  a  Church  composes  but 
one  congregation,  the  Minister  is  unquestionably  a  scriptural  Bishop ; 
but  he  is,  and  can  be,  only  Bishop  of  the  flock,  episcopus  gregis. 
Of  this  kind,  it  appears  from  the  extract  given  above  from  Epipha- 
nius,  were  some  of  the  primitive  Churches,  existing,  probably,  in 
the  smaller  and  more  remote  places.  Where  a  number  of  Pres- 
byters were  ordained  to  one  Church,  these  would,  in  their  common 
assembly,  have  the  oversight  and  government  of  each  other  as  well 
as  of  the  people  ;  and,  in  this  their  collective  capacity,  they  would 
be  episcopi  gregis  et  pastorwn.  In  this  manner,  Episcopacy,  as 
implying  the  oversight  and  government  both  of  Ministers  and  their 
flocks,  exists  in  Presbyterian  Churches,  and  in  all  others,  by  what- 
ever name  they  are  called,  where  Ministers  are  subject  to  the  dis- 
cipline of  assemblies  of  Ministers  who  admit  to  the  Ministry  by  joint 

36* 


330  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [FART 

consent,  and  censure  or  remove  those  who  are  so  appointed.  "When 
the  ancient  Presbyteries  elected  a  Bishop,  he  might  remain,  as  he 
appears  to  have  done  for  some  time,  the  mere  president  of  the 
assembly  of  Presbyters,  and  their  organ  of  administration  ;  or  be 
constituted,  as  afterwards,  a  distinct  governing  power,  although 
assisted  by  the  advice  of  his  Presbyters.  He  was  then  in  person 
an  episcopus  gregis  et  pastorwn,  and  his  official  powers  gave  rise  at 
length  to  the  unfounded  distinction  of  superior  order.  But  abating 
this  false  principle,  even  diocesan  Episcopacy  may  be  considered  as 
in  many  possible  associations  of  Churches  throughout  a  province, 
or  a  whole  country,  as  an  arrangement  in  some  circumstances  of 
a  wise  and  salutary  nature.  Nor  do  the  evils  which  arose  in  the 
Church  of  Christ  appear  so  attributable  to  this  form  of  government 
as  to  that  too  intimate  connexion  of  the  Church  with  the  State, 
which  gave  to  the  former  a  political  character,  and  took  it  from 
under  the  salutary  control  of  public  opinion, — an  evil  greatly 
increased  by  the  subsequent  destruction  of  religious  liberty,  and 
the  coercive  interferences  of  the  civil  Magistrate. 

At  the  same  time,  it  may  be  very  well  questioned,  whether  any 
Presbyters  could  lawfully  surrender  into  the  hands  of  a  Bishop 
their  own  rights  of  government  and  ordination  without  that  secu- 
rity for  their  due  administration  which  arises  from  the  accountability 
of  the  administrator.  That  these  are  rights  which  it  is  not  impera- 
tive upon  the  individual  possessing  them  to  exercise  individually, 
appears  to  have  the  judgment  of  the  earliest  antiquity,  because  the 
assembly  of  Presbyters,  which  was  probably  co-existent  with  the 
ordination  of  several  Presbyters  to  one  Church  by  the  Apostles, 
necessarily  placed  the  exercise  of  the  office  of  each  under  the 
direction  and  control  of  all.  When  therefore  a  Bishop  was  chosen 
by  the  Presbyters,  and  invested  with  the  government,  and  the  power 
of  granting  orders,  so  long  as  the  Presbyters  remained  his  Council, 
and  nothing  was  done  but  by  their  concurrence,  they  were  still 
parties  to  the  mode  in  which  their  own  powers  were  exercised, 
and  were  justifiable  in  placing  the  administration  in  the  hands  of 
one,  who  was  still  dependent  upon  themselves.  In  this  way  they 
probably  thought  that  their  own  powers  might  be  most  efficiently 
and  usefully  exercised.  Provincial  and  national  Synods  or  Coun- 
cils, exercising  a  proper  superintendence  over  Bishops  when  made 
even  more  independent  of  their  Presbyters  than  was  the  case  in 
the  best  periods  of  the  primitive  Church,  might  also,  if  meeting 
frequently  and  regularly,  and  as  a  part  of  an  ecclesiastical  system, 
afford  the  same  security  for  good  administration,  and  might  justify 
the  surrender  of  the  exercise  of  their  powers  by  the  Presbyters. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  331 

But  when  that  surrender  was  formally  made,  or  is  at  any  time 
made  now  in  the  constitution  of  Churches,  to  Bishops,  or  to  those 
bearing  a  similar  office  however  designated,  without  security  and 
control,  either  by  making  that  office  temporary  and  elective,  or  by 
the  constitution  of  Synods  or  Assemblies  of  the  Ministers  of  a  large 
and  united  body  of  Christians  for  the  purpose  of  supreme  govern- 
ment, an  office  is  created  which  has  not  only  no  countenance  in 
Scripture,  that  of  a  Bishop  independent  of  Presbyters,  but  one 
which  implies  an  unlawful  surrender  of  those  powers,  on  the  part 
of  the  latter,  with  which  they  were  invested,  not  for  their  own 
sakes,  but  for  the  benefit  of  the  Church ;  and  which  they  could 
have  no  authority  to  divest  themselves  of  and  to  transfer,  without 
retaining  the  power  of  counselling  and  controlling  the  party  charged 
with  the  administration  of  them.  In  other  words,  Presbyters  have 
a  right,  under  proper  regulations,  to  appoint  another  to  administer 
for  them,  or  to  consent  to  such  an  arrangement  when  they  find  it 
already  existing ;  but  they  have  no  power  to  divest  themselves  of 
these  rights  and  duties  absolutely.  If  these  principles  be  sound, 
modern  Episcopacy,  in  many  Churches,  is  objectionable  in  other 
respects  than  as  it  assumes  an  unscriptural  distinction  of  order. 

The  following  is  a  liberal  concession  on  the  subject  of  Episco- 
pacy, from  a  strenuous  defender  of  that  form  of  government  as  it 
exists  in  the  Church  of  England  : — 

"  It  is  not  contended  that  the  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  of 
England,  are  at  present  precisely  the  same  that  Bishops,  Presby- 
ters, and  Deacons,  were  in  Asia  Minor  seventeen  hundred  years 
ago.  We  only  maintain  that  there  have  always  been  Bishops, 
Priests,  and  Deacons,  in  the  Christian  Church,  since  the  days  of 
the  Apostles,  with  different  powers  and  functions,  it  is  allowed,  in 
different  countries  and  at  different  periods ;  but  the  general  prin- 
ciples and  duties  which  have  respectively  characterized  these 
clerical  orders,  have  been  essentially  the  same  at  all  times,  and 
in  all  places ;  and  the  variations  which  they  have  undergone,  have 
only  been  such  as  have  ever  belonged  to  all  persons  in  public 
situations,  whether  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  and  which  are  indeed 
inseparable  from  every  thing  in  which  mankind  are  concerned  in 
this  transitory  and  fluctuating  world. 

"  I  have  thought  it  right  to  take  this  general  view  of  the  minis- 
terial office,  and  to  make  these  observations  upon  the  clerical 
orders  subsisting  in  this  kingdom,  for  the  purpose  of  pointing  out 
the  foundation  and  principles  of  Church  authority,  and  of  showing 
that  our  ecclesiastical  establishment  is  as  nearly  conformable,  as 
change  of  circumstances  will  permit,  to  the  practice  of  the  primitive 


332  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

Church.  But,  though  I  flatter  myself  that  I  have  proved  Episco- 
pacy to  be  an  Apostolical  institution,  yet  I  readily  acknowledge 
that  there  is  no  precept  in  the  New  Testament  which  commands 
that  every  Church  should  be  governed  by  Bishops.  No  Church 
can  exist  without  some  government ;  but  though  there  must  be 
rules  and  orders  for  the  proper  discharge  of  the  offices  of  public 
worship,  though  there  must  be  fixed  regulations  concerning  the 
appointment  of  Ministers,  and  though  a  subordination  among  them 
is  expedient  in  the  highest  degree,  yet  it  does  not  follow  that  all 
these  things  must  be  precisely  the  same  in  every  Christian  coun- 
try ;  they  may  vary  with  the  other  varying  circumstances  of  human 
society,  with  the  extent  of  a  country,  the  manners  of  its  inhabit- 
ants, the  nature  of  its  civil  government,  and  many  other  peculiarities 
which  might  be  specified.  As  it  has  not  pleased  our  Almighty  Fa- 
ther to  prescribe  any  particular  form  of  civil  government  for  the 
security  of  temporal  comforts  to  his  rational  creatures,  so  neither 
has  he  prescribed  any  particular  form  of  ecclesiastical  polity  as 
absolutely  necessary  to  the  attainment  of  eternal  happiness.  But 
he  has,  in  the  most  explicit  terms,  enjoined  obedience  to  all  govern- 
ors, whether  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  and  whatever  may  be  their 
denomination,  as  essential  to  the  character  of  a  true  Christian. 
Thus  the  Gospel  only  lays  down  general  principles,  and  leaves  the 
application  of  them  to  men  as  free  agents."(2) 

Bishop  Tomline,  however,  and  the  high  Episcopalians  of  the 
Church  of  England,  contend  for  an  original  distinction  in  the 
office  and  order  of  Bishops  and  Presbyters,  in  which  notion  they 
are  contradicted  by  one  who  may  be  truly  called  the  Founder  of 
the  Church  of  England,  Archbishop  Cranmer,  who  says,  "  The 
Bishops  and  Priests  were  at  one  time,  and  were  not  two  things ; 
but  both  one  office  in  the  beginning  of  Christ's  religion."(3) 

On  the  subject  of  the  Church  itself,  opinions  as  opposite  or 
varying  as  possible  have  been  held,  down  from  that  of  the  Papists, 
who  contend  for  its  visible  unity  throughout  the  world  under  a 
visible  head,  to  that  of  the  Independents,  who  consider  the  uni- 
versal Church  as  composed  of  congregational  Churches,  each 
perfect  in  itself,  and  entirely  independent  of  every  other. 

The  first  opinion  is  manifestly  contradicted  by  the  language  of  the 
Apostles,  who,  whilst  they  teach  that  there  is  but  one  Church,  com- 
posed of  believers  throughout  the  world,  think  it  not  at  all  incon- 
sistent with  this  to  speak  of  "the  Churches  of  Judea,"  "of  Achaia," 
"  the  seven  Churches  of  Asia,"  "  the  Church  at  Ephesus,"  &c. 

(2)  Bishop  Tomline's  Elements.  (3)  Stulingfleet's  Irenicum,  p.  392. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  333 

Among  themselves  the  Apostles  had  no  common  head ;  but  planted 
Churches  and  gave  directions  for  their  government,  in  most  cases 
without  any  apparent  correspondence  with  each  other.  The  popish 
doctrine  is  certainly  not  found  in  their  writings,  and  so  far  were 
they  from  making  provision  for  the  government  of  this  one  sup- 
posed Church,  by  the  appointment  of  one  visible  and  exclusive 
head,  that  they  provide  for  the  future  government  of  the  respective 
Churches  raised  up  by  them,  in  a  totally  different  manner,  that  is, 
Iry  the  ordination  of  Ministers  for  each  Church,  who  are  indiffer- 
ently called  Bishops,  and  Presbyters,  and  Pastors.  The  only  unity 
of  which  they  speak  is  the  unity  of  the  whole  Church  in  Christ, 
the  invisible  Head,  by  faith  ;  and  the  unity  produced  by  "  fervent 
love  towards  each  other."  Nor  has  the  popish  doctrine  of  the 
visible  unity  of  the  Church  any  countenance  from  early  antiquity. 
The  best  ecclesiastical  historians  have  showed,  that,  through  the 
greater  part  of  the  second  century,  "the  Christian  Churches  were 
independent  of  each  other.  Each  Christian  assembly  was  a  little 
State  governed  by  its  own  laws,  which  were  either  enacted,  or  at 
least  approved  by  the  society.  But  in  process  of  time,  all  the 
Churches  of  a  province  were  formed  into  one  large  ecclesiastical 
body,  which,  like  confederate  States,  assembled  at  certain  times  in 
order  to  deliberate  about  the  common  interests  of  the  whole." (4) 
So  far  indeed  this  union  of  Churches  appears  to  have  been  a  wise 
and  useful  arrangement,  although  afterwards  it  was  carried  to  an 
injurious  extreme,  until  finally  it  gave  birth  to  the  assumptions  of 
the  Bishop  of  Rome,  as  universal  Bishop ;  a  claim,  however,  which 
when  most  successful,  was  but  partially  submitted  to,  the  Eastern 
Churches  having  always  maintained  their  independence.  No  very 
large  association  of  Churches  of  any  kind  existed  till  towards  the 
close  of  the  second  century,  which  sufficiently  refutes  the  papal 
argument  from  antiquity. 

The  independence  of  the  early  Christian  Churches  does  not, 
however,  appear  to  have  resembled  that  of  the  Churches  which  in 
modern  times  are  called  Independent.  During  the  lives  of  the 
Apostles  and  Evangelists,  they  were  certainly  subject  to  their 
counsel  and  control,  which  proves  that  the  independency  of  sepa- 
rate societies  was  not  the  first  form  of  the  Church.  It  may,  indeed, 
be  allowed,  that  some  of  the  smaller  and  more  insulated  Churches 
might,  after  the  death  of  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists,  retain  this 
form  for  some  considerable  time ;  but  the  larger  Churches,  in  the 
chief  cities,  and  those  planted  in  populous  neighbourhoods,  had 

(4)  Mo8HEiM's  Ecclesiastical  History,  Cent.  2,  Chap.  ii. 


»--    •-«• 


334  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

many  Presbyters,  and  as  the  members  multiplied,  they  had  several 
separate  assemblies  or  congregations,  yet  all  under  the  same  com- 
mon government.  And  when  Churches  were  raised  up  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  cities,  the  appointment  of  Chorepiscopi,  or  coun- 
try Bishops,  and  of  visiting  Presbyters,  both  acting  under  the 
Presbytery  of  the  city,  with  its  Bishop  at  its  head,  is  sufficiently  in 
proof,  that  the  ancient  Churches,  especially  the  larger  and  more 
prosperous  of  them,  existed  in  that  form  which,  in  modern  times, 
we  should  call  a  religious  Connexion,  subject  to  a  common  govern- 
ment. This  appears  to  have  arisen  out  of  the  very  circumstance 
of  the  increase  of  the  Church,  through  the  zeal  of  the  first  Chris- 
tians ;  and  in  the  absence  of  all  direction  by  the  Apostles,  that 
every  new  society  of  believers  raised  should  be  formed  into  an 
Independent  Church,  it  was  doubtless  much  more  in  the  spirit  of 
the  very  first  discipline  exercised  by  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists, 
(when  none  of  the  Churches  were  independent,  but  remained 
under  the  government  of  those  who  had  been  chiefly  instrumental 
in  raising  them  up,)  to  place  themselves  under  a  common  inspec- 
tion, and  to  unite  the  weak  with  the  strong,  and  the  newly  con- 
verted with  those  who  were  "  in  Christ  before  them."  There  was 
also  in  this,  greater  security  afforded  both  for  the  continuance  of 
wholesome  doctrine,  and  of  godly  discipline. 

The  persons  appointed  to  feed  and  govern  the  Church  of  Christ 
being,  then,  as  we  have  seen,  those  who  are  called  " Pastors"  a 
word  which  imports  both  care  and  government,  two  other  subjects 
claim  our  attention, — the  share  which  the  body  of  the  people  have 
in  their  own  government  by  their  Pastors,  and  the  objects  towards 
which  the  power  of  government,  thus  established  in  the  Church,  is 
legitimately  directed. 

As  to  the  first,  some  preliminary  observations  may  be  necessary, 
1.  When  Churches  are  professedly  connected  with,  and  exclu- 
sively patronized  and  upheld  by,  the  State,  questions  of  ecclesias- 
tical government  arise,  which  are  of  greater  perplexity  and  difficulty 
than  when  they  are  left  upon  their  original  ground,  as  voluntary 
and  spiritual  associations.  The  State  will  not  exclusively  recognise 
Ministers  without  maintaining  some  control  over  their  functions ; 
and  will  not  lend  its  aid  to  enforce  the  canons  of  an  established 
Church,  without  reserving  to  itself  some  right  of  appeal,  or  of 
interposition.  Hence  a  contest  between  the  civil  and  ecclesiasti- 
cal powers  often  springs  up,  and  one  at  least  generally  feels  itself 
to  be  fettered  by  the  other.  When  an  established  Church  is  per- 
fectly tolerant,  and  the  State  allows  freedom  of  dissent  and  separa- 
tion from  it  without  penalties,  these  evils  are  much  mitigated.   But 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  335 

it  is  not  my  design  to  consider  a  Church  as  at  all  allied  with  the 
State  ;  but  as  deriving  nothing  from  it  except  protection,  and  that 
general  countenance  which  the  influence  of  a  government,  pro- 
fessing Christianity  and  recognising  its  laws,  must  afford. 

2.  The  only  view  in  which  the  sacred  writers  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment appear  to  have  contemplated  the  Churches,  was  that  of 
associations  founded  upon  conviction  of  the  truth  of  Christianity, 
and  the  obligatory  nature  of  the  commands  of  Christ.  They  con- 
sidered the  Pastors  as  dependent  for  their  suppbrt  upon  the  free 
contributions  of  the  people ;  and  the  people  as  bound  to  sustain, 
love,  and  obey  them  in  all  things  lawful,  that  is,  in  all  things  agree- 
able to  the  doctrine  they  had  received  in  the  Scriptures,  and,  in 
things  indifferent,  to  pay  respectful  deference  to  them.  They 
enjoined  it  upon  the  Pastors  to  "  rule  well,"  "  diligently,"  and 
with  fidelity,  in  executing  the  directions  they  had  given  them ; — 
to  silence  all  teachers  of  false  doctrines,  and  their  adherents  ; — to 
reprove  unruly  and  immoral  members  of  the  Church,  and,  if  incor- 
rigible, to  put  them  away.  On  the  other  hand,  should  any  of  their 
Pastors  or  Teachers  err  in  doctrine,  the  people  are  enjoined  not 
"  to  receive  them,"  to  "  turn  away"  from  them,  and  not  even  to  bid 
them  "  God  speed."  The  rule  which  forbids  Christians  "  to  eat," 
that  is,  to  communicate  at  the  Lord's  table  with  an  immoral  "  bro- 
ther," held,  of  course,  good,  when  that  brother  was  a  Pastor.  Thus 
Pastors  were  put  by  them  under  the  influence  of  the  public  opinion 
of  the  Churches ;  and  the  remedy  of  separating  from  them,  in 
manifest  defections  of  doctrine  and  morals,  was  afforded  to  the 
sound  members  of  a  Church,  should  no  power  exist,  able  or 
inclined  to  silence  the  offending  Pastor  and  his  party.  In  all  this, 
principles  were  recognised,  which,  had  they  not  been  in  future 
times  lost  sight  of  or  violated,  would  have  done  much,  perhaps 
every  thing,  to  preserve  some  parts  of  the  Church,  at  least,  in 
soundness  of  faith,  and  purity  of  manners.  A  perfect  religious 
liberty  is  always  supposed  by  the  Apostles  to  exist  among  Chris- 
tians ;  no  compulsion  of  the  civil  power  is  any  where  assumed  by 
them  as  the  basis  of  their  advices  or  directions  ;  no  binding  of  the 
members  to  one  Church,  without  liberty  to  join  another,  by  any 
ties  but  those  involved  in  moral  considerations,  of  sufficient  weight, 
however,  to  prevent  the  evils  of  faction  and  schism.  It  was  this 
which  created  a  natural  and  competent  check  upon  the  Ministers 
of  the  Church ;  for  being  only  sustained  by  the  opinion  of  the 
Churches,  they  could  not  but  have  respect  to  it ;  and  it  was  this 
which  gave  to  the  sound  part  of  a  fallen  Church  the  advantage  of 
renouncing,  upon  sufficient  and  well  weighed  grounds,  their  com- 


336  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

munion  with  it,  and  of  kindling  up  the  light  of  a  pure  ministry  and 
a  holy  discipline,  by  forming  a  separate  association,  bearing  its 
testimony  against  errors  in  doctrine,  and  failures  in  practice.  Nor 
is  it  to  be  conceived,  that,  had  this  simple  principle  of  perfect  reli- 
gious liberty  been  left  unviolated  through  subsequent  ages,  the 
Church  could  ever  have  become  so  corrupt,  or  with  such  difficulty 
and  slowness  have  been  recovered  from  its  fall.  This  ancient  Chris- 
tian liberty  has  happily  been  restored  in  a  few  parts  of  Christendom. 

3.  In  places  where  now  the  communion  with  particular  Churches, 
as  to  human  authority,  is  perfectly  voluntary,  and  liberty  of  con- 
science is  unfettered,  it  often  happens  that  questions  of  Church 
government  are  argued  on  the  assumption  that  the  governing 
power  in  such  Churches  is  of  the  same  character,  and  tends  to 
the  same  results,  as  where  it  is  connected  with  civil  influence,  and 
is  upheld  by  the  power  of  the  State. 

Nothing  can  be  more  fallacious,  and  no  instrument  has  been  so 
powerful  as  this  in  the  hands  of  the  restless  and  factious,  to  delude 
the  unwary.  Those  who  possess  the  governing  power  in  such 
Churches  are  always  under  the  influence  of  public  opinion  to  an 
extent  unfelt  in  establishments.  They  can  enforce  nothing  felt  to 
be  oppressive  to  the  members  in  general,  without  dissolving  the 
society  itself;  and  their  utmost  power  extends  to  excision  from  the 
body,  which,  unlike  the  sentences  of  excommunication  in  State 
Churches,  is  wholly  unconnected  with  civil  penalties.  If,  then,  a 
resistance  is  created  to  any  regulations  among  the  major  part  of 
any  such  religious  community,  founded  on  a  sense  of  their  inju- 
rious operation,  or  to  the  manner  of  their  enforcement ;  and  if 
that  feeling  be  the  result  of  a  settled  conviction,  and  not  the  effer- 
vescence of  temporary  mistake  and  excitement,  a  change  must 
necessarily  ensue,  or  the  body  at  large  be  disturbed  or  dissolved  : 
if,  on  the  other  hand,  this  feeling  be  the  work  of  a  mere  faction, 
partial  tumults  or  separation  may  take  place,  and  great  moral  evil 
may  result  to  the  factious  parties,  but  the  body  will  retain  its  com- 
munion, which  will  be  a  sufficient  proof  that  the  governing  power 
has  been  the  subject  of  ungrounded  and  uncharitable  attack,  since 
otherwise  the  people  at  large  must  have  felt  the  evils  of  the  general 
regulations  or  administration  complained  of.  The  very  terms  often 
used  in  the  grand  controversy  arising  out  of  the  struggle  for  the 
establishment  of  religious  liberty  with  national  and  intolerant 
Churches,  are  not  generally  appropriate  to  such  discussions  as 
may  arise  in  voluntary  religious  societies,  although  they  are  often 
employed,  either  carelessly  or  ad  captandum,  to  serve  the  purposes 
of  faction. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  337 

4.  It  is  also  an  important  general  observation,  that,  in  settline 
the  government  of  a  Church,  there  are  pre-existent  laws  of  Christ, 
which  it  is  not  in  the  option  of  any  to  receive  or  to  reject.  Unde; 
whatever  form  the  governing  power  is  arranged,  it  is  so  bound  to 
execute  all  the  rules  left  by  Christ  and  his  Apostles,  as  to  doctrine;, 
worship,  the  sacraments,  and  discipline,  honestly  interpreted,  thai 
It  is  not  at  liberty  to  take  that  office,  or  to  continue  to  exercise  it. 
if  by  any  restrictions  imposed  upon  it  it  is  prevented  from  carrying 
these  laws  into  effect.  As  in  the  State,  so  in  the  Church,  govern- 
ment is  an  ordinance  of  God ;  and  as  it  is  imperative  upon  rulers 
in  the  State  to  be  "a  terror  to  evil  doers,  and  a  praise  to  them 
that  do  well,"  so  also  is  it  imperative  upon  the  rulers  of  the  Church 
to  banish  strange  doctrines,  to  uphold  God's  ordinances,  to  reprove 
and  rebuke,  and,  finally,  to  put  away  evil  doers.  The  spirit  in 
which  this  is  to  be  done  is  also  prescribed.  It  is  to  be  done  in  the 
spirit  of  meekness,  and  with  long  suffering ;  but  the  Avork  must  b< 
done  upon  the  responsibility  of  the  Pastors  to  Him  Avho  has  com- 
missioned them  for  this  purpose  ;  and  they  have  a  right  to  require 
from  the  people,  that  in  this  office  and  ministry  they  should  nc; 
only  not  be  obstructed,  but  affectionately  and  zealously  aided,  as 
ministering  in  these  duties,  sometimes  painful,  not  for  themselves, 
but  for  the  good  of  the  whole.  With  respect  to  the  members  of  a 
Church,  the  same  remark  is  applicable  as  to  the  members  of  :i 
State.  It  is  not  matter  of  option  with  them  whether  they  will  be 
under  government  according  to  the  laws  of  Christ  or  not,  for  that 
is  imperative  ;  government  in  both  cases  being  of  Divine  appoint- 
ment. They  have,  on  the  other  hand,  the  right  to  full  security, 
that  they  shall  be  governed  by  the  laws  of  Christ ;  and  they  have 
a  right  too  to  establish  as  many  guards  against  human  infirmity 
and  passion  in  those  who  are  "set  over  them,"  as  may  be  pru- 
dently devised,  provided  these  are  not  carried  to  such  an  extent 
as  to  be  obstructive  to  the  legitimate  scriptural  discharge  of  their 
duties.  The  true  view  of  the  case  appears  to  be,  that  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  is  in  its  Pastors,  open  to  various  modifications 
as  to  form  ;  and  that  it  is  to  be  conducted  with  such  a  concurrence 
of  the  people,  as  shall  constitute  a  sufficient  guard  against  abuse, 
and  yet  not  prevent  the  legitimate  and  efficient  exercise  of  pas- 
toral duties,  as  these  duties  are  stated  in  the  Scriptures.  This 
original  authority  in  the  Pastors,  and  concurrent  consent  in  the 
people,  may  be  thus  applied  to  particular  cases  : — 

1.  As  to  the  ordination  of  Ministers.  If  we  consult  the  New 
Testament,  this  office  was  never  conveyed  by  the  people.  The 
Apostles  were  ordained  by  our  Lord ;  the  Evangelists,  bv  the 

Vol.  III.  37 


338  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

Apostles ;  the  Elders  in  every  Church,  both  by  Apostles  and 
Evangelists.  The  passage  which  has  been  chiefly  urged  by  those 
who  would  originate  the  ministry  from  the  people,  is  Acts  xiv,  23, 
where  the  historian,  speaking  of  St.  Paul  and  Barnabas,  says, 
"  And  wjjen  they  had  ordained  (xs'?0T0V^<favrss)  Elders  in  every 
Church,  and  had  prayed  with  fasting,  they  commended  them  to 
the  Lord."  Here,  because  x£,p0T0V,Slv  originally  signified  to  choose 
by  way  of  suffrage,  some  have  argued  that  these  Elders  were 
appointed  by  the  suffrages  of  the  people.  Long,  however,  before 
the  time  of  St.  Luke,  this  word  was  used  for  simple  designation, 
without  any  reference  to  election  by  suffrages ;  and  so  it  is  em- 
ployed by  St.  Luke  himself  in  the  same  book,  Acts  x,  41,  "Witnesses 
foreappolnted  of  God,"  where  of  course  the  suffrages  of  men  arc 
out  of  the  question.  It  is  also  fatal  to  the  argument  drawn  from 
the  text,  that  the  act  implied  in  the  word,  whatever  it  might  be. 
was  not  the  act  of  the  people,  but  that  of  Paul  and  Barnabas, 
Even  the  Deacons,  whose  appointment  is  mentioned  Acts  vi, 
although  "looked  out"  by  the  disciples  as  men  of  honest  report, 
did  not  enter  upon  their  office  till  solemnly  "appointed"  thereto 
by  the  Apostles.  Nothing  is  clearer  in  the  New  Testament,  than 
that  all  the  candidates  for  the  ministry  were  judged  of  by  those 
who  had  been  placed  in  that  office  themselves,  and  received  their 
appointment  from  them.  Such  too  was  the  practice  of  the  primi- 
tive Churches  alter  the  death  of  both  Apostles  and  Evangelists. 
Presbyters,  who  during  the  life  of  the  Apostles  had  the  power  of 
ordination,  (for  they  laid  their  hands  upon  Timothy,)  continued  to 
perform  that  office  in  discharge  of  one  solemn  part  of  their  duty, 
to  perpetuate  the  ministry,  and  to  provide  for  the  wants  of  the 
Churches.  In  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  who  were  endued  with 
special  gifts,  the  concurrence  of  the  people  was  not,  perhaps, 
always  formally  taken ;  but  the  directions  to  Timothy  and  Titus 
imply  a  reference  to  the  judgment  of  the  members  of  the  Church, 
because  from  them  only  it  could  be  learned  whether  the  party  fixed 
upon  for  ordination  possessed  those  qualifications  without  which 
ordination  was  prohibited.  When  the  Churches  assumed  a  more 
regular  form,  "  the  people  were  always  present  at  ordinations,  and 
ratified  the  action  with  their  approbation  and  consent.  To  this 
end  the  Bishop  was  wont  before  every  ordination  to  publish  the 
names  of  those  who  were  to  have  holy  orders  conferred  upon 
them,  that  so  the  people,  who  best  knew  their  lives  and  conversa- 
tion, might  interpose  if  they  had  any  thing  material  to  object  against 
'them. "(5)  Sometimes  also  they  nominated  them  by  suffrages*,  and 

(5)  Cave's  Primitive  Christianity. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  339, 

thus  proposed  them  for  ordination.  The  mode  in  which  the  people 
shall  be  made  a  concurrent  party  is  matter  of  prudential  regula- 
tion ;  but  they  had  an  early,  and  certainly  a  reasonable  right  to  a 
voice  in  the  appointment  of  their  Ministers,  although  the  power  of 
ordination  was  vested  in  Ministers  alone,  to  be  exercised  on  their 
responsibility  to  Christ. 

2.  As  to  the  laws  by  which  the  Church  is  /to  be  governed.  So 
far  as  they  are  manifestly  laid  down  in  the  word  of  God,  and  not 
regulations  judged  to  be  subsidiary  thereto,  it  is  plain  that  the 
rulers  of  a  Church  are  bound  to  execute  them,  and  the  people  to 
obey  them.  They  cannot  be  matter  of  compact  on  either  side, 
except  as  the  subject  of  a  mutual  and  solemn  engagement  to  defer 
to  them  without  any  modification  or  appeal  to  any  other  standard. 

Every  Church  declares  in  some  way,  how  it  understands  the 
doctrine  and  the  disciplinary  laws  of  Christ.  This  declaration  as 
to  doctrine,  in  modern  times,  is  made  by  confessions  or  articles  of 
faith,  in  which,  if  fundamental  error  is  found,  the  evil  rests  upon 
the  head  of  that  Church  collectively,  and  upon  the  members  indi- 
vidually, every  one  of  whom  is  bound  to  try  all  doctrines  by  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  and  cannot  support  an  acknowledged  system  of 
error  without  guilt.  As  to  discipline,  the  manner  in  which  a 
Church  provides  for  public  worship,  the  publication  of  the  Gospel, 
the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  the  instruction  of  the  igno- 
rant, the  succour  of  the  distressed,  the  admonition  of  the  disorderly, 
and  the  excision  of  offenders,  (which  are  all  points  on  which  the 
New  Testament  has  issued  express  injunctions,)  is  its  declaration 
of  the  manner  in  which  it  interprets  those  injunctions,  which  also 
it  does  on  its  own  collective  responsibility,  and  that  of  its  members. 
If,  however,  we  take  for  illustration  of  the  subject  before  us,  a. 
Church,  at  least  substantially  right  in  this  its  interpretation  of  doc- 
trine, and  of  the  laws  of  Christ  as  to  general,  and,  what  we  may 
call  for  distinction's  sake,  moral  discipline  ;  these  are  the  first 
principles  upon  which  this  Church  is  founded.  It  is  either  an 
apostolic  Church,  which  has  retained  primitive  faith  and  discipline  ; 
or  it  has  subsequently  been  collected  into  a  new  communion,  on 
account  of  the  fall  of  other  Churches  ;  and  has  placed  itself, 
according  to  its  own  conviction,  upon  the  basis  of  primitive  doc- 
trine and  discipline  as  found  in  the  Scriptures.  On  this  ground 
either  the  Pastors  and  people  met  and  united  at  first ;  or  the  people, 
converted  to  faith  and  holiness  by  the  labours  of  one  or  more 
Pastors,  holding,  as  they  believed,  these  scriptural  views,  placed 
themselves  under  the  guidance  of  these  Pastors,  and  thus  formed 
themselves  into  a  Church  state,  which  was  their  act  of  accession 


340  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

to  these  principles.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  by  this  very  act. 
they  bind  themselves  to  comply  with  the  original  terms  of  the 
communion  into  which  they  have  entered,  and  that  they  have  as  to 
these  doctrines,  and  as  to  these  disciplinary  laws  of  Christ,  which  are 
to  be  preached  and  enforced,  no  rights  of  control  over  Ministers, 
which  shall  prevent  the  just  exercise  of  their  office  in  these  respects- 
They  have  a  right  to  such  regulations  and  checks  as  shall  secure. 
in  the  best  possible  way,  the  just  and  faithful  exercise  of  that  office. 
and  the  honest  and  impartial  use  of  that  power ;  but  this  is  the 
"hint  of  their  right ;  and  every  system  of  suffrages,  or  popular  con- 
currence, which,  under  pretence  of  guarding  against  abuse  of 
ministerial  authority,  makes  its  exercise  absolutely  and  in  all  case? 
dependent  upon  the  consent  of  those  over  whom  it  extends,  goes 
beyond  that  limit,  and  invades  the  right  of  pastoral  government, 
which  the  New  Testament  has  established.  It  brings,  in  a  word, 
die  laws  of  Christ  into  debate,  which  yet  the  members  profess  to 
have  received  as  their  rule ;  and  it  claims  to  put  into  commission 
ihose  duties  which  Pastors  are  charged  by  Christ  personally  to 
exercise.  The  Apostle  Paul,  had  the  incestuous  person  at  Corinth 
denied  the  crime,  and  there  had  been  any  doubtfulness  as  to  the 
fact,  would  unquestionably  have  taken  the  opinion  of  the  Elders 
of  that  Church  and  others  upon  that  fact ;  but  when  it  became  a 
question  whether  the  laws  of  Christ's  discipline  should  be  exercised 
or  not,  he  did  not  feel  himself  concluded  by  the  sense  of  the  whole 
Corinthian  Church,  which  was  in  favour  of  the  offender  continuing 
in  communion  with  them  ;  but  he  instantly  reproved  them  for  their 
laxity,  and  issued  the  sentence  of  excision,  thereby  showing  that  an 
obvious  law  of  Christ  was  not  to  be  subjected  to  the  decision  of  a 
majority. 

This  view  indeed  supposes,  that  such  a  society,  like  almost  all 
the  Churches  ever  known,  has  admitted  in  the  first  instance,  that 
the  power  of  admission  into  the  Church,  of  reproof,  of  exhorta- 
tion, and  of  excision  from  it,  subject  to  various  guards  against 
abuses,  is  in  the  Pastors  of  a  Church.  There  are  some  who  have 
adopted  a  different  opinion,  supposing  that  the  power  of  adminis- 
tering the  discipline  of  Christ  must  be  conveyed  by  them  to  their 
Ministers,  and  is  to  be  wholly  controlled  by  their  suffrages ;  so 
that  there  is  in  these  systems,  not  a  provision  of  counsel  against 
possible  errors  in  the  exercise  of  authority  ;  not  a  guard  against 
human  infirmity  or  viciousness ;  not  a  reservation  of  right  to  deter- 
mine upon  the  fitness  of  the  cases  to  which  the  laws  of  Christ  arc 
applied ;  but  a  claim  of  co-administration  as  to  these  laws  them- 
selves, or  rather  an  entire  administration  of  them  through  the  Pas- 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  341 

tor,  as  a  passive  agent  of  their-  will.  Those  who  adopt  these  views 
are  bound  to  show  that  this  is  the  state  of  things  established  in  the 
New  Testament.  That  it  is  not,  appears  plain  from  the  very  term 
4<  Pastors,"  which  imports  both  care  and  government ;  mild  and 
affectionate  government  indeed,  but  still  government.  Hence  the 
office  of  Shepherd  is  applied  to  describe  the  government  of  God, 
and  the  government  of  kings.  It  appears  too,  from  other  titles 
given,  not  merely  to  Apostles,  but  to  the  Presbyters  they  ordained 
and  placed  over  the  Churches.  They  are  called  i/o^svoi,  rulers; 
itfirfKotfoi,  overseers ;  -apoztfrurts,  those  who  preside.  They  are  com- 
mended for  "  ruling  well ;"  and  they  are  directed  "  to  charge," 
"  to  reprove,"  "  to  rebuke,"  "  to  watch,"  "  to  silence,"  "  to  put 
away."  The  very  "account"  they  must  give  to  God,  in  connexion 
with  the  discharge  of  these  duties,  shows  that  their  office  and  re- 
sponsibility was  peculiar  and  personal,  and  much  greater  than  that 
of  any  private  member  of  the  Church,  which  it  could  not  be  if 
they  were  the  passive  agents  only  in  matters  of  doctrine  and  dis- 
cipline of  the  will  of  the  whole.  To  the  double  duty  of  feeding 
and  exercising  the  oversight  of  the  flock,  a  special  reward  is  also 
promised  when  the  "  Chief  Shepherd  shall  appear," — a  title  of 
Christ,  which  shows  that  as  the  pastoral  office  of  feeding  and  ruling 
is  exercised  by  Christ  supremely,  so  it  is  exercised  by  his  Ministers 
in  both  branches  subordinately.  Finally,  the  exhortations  to  Chris- 
tians to  "obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  them,"  and  to  "submit" 
to  them,  and  "to  esteem  them  very  highly  for  their  works'  sake,"' 
and  to  "  remember  them  ;" — all  show  that  the  ministerial  office  is 
not  one  of  mere  agency,  under  the  absolute  direction  of  the  votes 
of  the  collected  Church. 

3.  With  respect  to  other  disciplinary  regulations,  supposed  by 
any  religious  society  to  be  subsidiary  to  the  great  and  scriptural 
ends  of  Church  communion,  these  appear  to  be  matters  of  mutual 
agreement,  and  are  capable  of  modification  by  the  mutual  consent 
of  Ministers  and  people,  under  their  common  responsibility  to 
Christ,  that  they  are  done  advisedly,  with  prayer,  with  reference 
to  the  edification  of  the  Church,  and  so  as  not  to  infringe  upon, 
but  to  promote,  the  influence  of  the  doctrines,  duties,  and  spirit  of 
the  Gospel.  The  consent  of  the  people  to  all  such  regulations, 
either  tacitly  by  their  adoption  of  them,  or  more  expressly  through 
any  regular  meetings  of  different  officers,  who  may  be  regarded  as 
acquainted  with,  and  representing  the  sentiments  of  the  whole  ;  as 
also  by  the  approval  of  those  aged,  wise,  and  from  different  causes, 
influential  persons,  who  are  to  be  found  in  all  societies,  and  who 
are  always,  whether  in  office  or  not,  their  natural  guardians,  guides, 

37* 


348  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  representatives,  is  necessary  to  confidence  and  harmony,  and 
a  proper  security  for  good  and  orderly  government.  It  is  thus  that: 
rhose  to  whom  the  government  or  well  ordering  of  the  Church  is 
committed,  and  those  upon  whom  their  influence  and  scriptural 
authority  exert  themselves,  appear  to  be  best  brought  into  a  state 
of  harmony  and  mutual  confidence  ;  and  that  abundant  security  is 
afforded  against  all  misrule,  seeing  that  in  a  voluntary  communion, 
and  where  perfect  liberty  exists  for  any  member  to  unite  himself  to 
other  Churches,  or  for  any  number  of  them  to  arrange  themselves 
into  a  new  community,  subject  however  to  the  moral  cautions  ol 
die  New  Testament  against  the  schismatic  spirit,  it  can  never  be 
the  interest  of  those  with  whom  the  regulation  of  the  affairs  of  a 
Church  is  lodged,  voluntarily  to  adopt  measures  which  can  be  ge- 
nerally felt  to  be  onerous  and  injurious,  nor  is  it  practicable  to  per- 
severe in  them.  In  this  method  of  bringing  in  the  concurrence  of 
the  people,  all  assemblages  of  whole  societies,  or  very  large  por- 
tions of  them,  are  avoided, — a  popular  form  of  Church  govern- 
ment, which,  however  it  were  modified  so  as  best  to  accord  with 
the  scriptural  authority  of  Ministers,  could  only  be  tolerable  in  ven 
small  isolated  societies,  and  that  in  the  times  of  their  greatest  sim- 
plicity and  love.  To  raise  into  legislators  and  censors  all  the  mem- 
bers of  a  Church,  the  young,  the  ignorant,  and  the  inexperienced, 
is  to  do  them  great  injury.  It  is  the  sure  way  to  ibster  debates. 
contentions,  and  self  confidence,  to  open  the  door  to  intrigue  and 
policy,  to  tempt  forward  and  conceited  men  to  become  a  kind  of 
religious  demagogues,  and  entirely  to  destroy  the  salutary  influence 
of  the  aged,  experienced,  and  gifted  members,  by  referring  every 
decision  to  members  and  suffrages,  and  placing  all  that  is  good  and 
venerable,  and  influential  among  the  members  themselves,  at  the 
feet  of  a  democracy. 

4.  As  to  the  power  of  admission  into  the  Church,  that  is  clearly 
with  Ministers,  to  whom  the  office  of  baptism  is  committed,  bj 
which  the  door  is  opened  into  the  Church  universal ;  and  as  there- 
can  be  no  visible  communion  kept  up  with  the  universal  Church, 
except  by  communion  with  some  particular  Church,  the  admission 
into  that  particular  communion  must  be  in  the  hands  of  Ministers, 
because  it  is  one  of  the  duties  of  their  office,  made  such  by  the 
Scripture  itself,  to  enjoin  this  mode  of  confessing  Christ,  by  assem- 
bling with  his  saints  in  worship,  by  submitting  to  discipline,  and  b} 
■'  showing  forth  his  death"  at  the  Lord's  Supper.  We  have,  how- 
ever, already  said,  that  the  members  of  a  Church,  although  they 
have  no  right  to  obstruct  the  just  exercise  of  this  power,  have  the 
right  to  prevent  its  being  unworthily  exercised ;  and  their  concur- 


)  OURTH.J  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  343 

rence  with  the  admission,  tacit  or  declared,  according  to  their 
usages,  is  an  arrangement,  supported  by  analogies  drawn  from  the 
New  Testament,  and  from  primitive  antiquity.  The  expulsion  of 
unworthy  members,  after  admonition,  devolves  upon  those  to  whom 
the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  the  signs  of  communion,  is 
entrusted,  and  therefore  upon  Ministers,  for  this  reason,  that  as 
"  Shepherds"  of  the  flock  under  the  "  Chief  Shepherd,"  they  are 
charged  to  carry  his  laws  into  effect.  These  laws,  it  is  neither  with 
them  nor  with  the  people  to  modify  ;  they  are  already  declared  by 
superior  authority ;  but  the  determination  of  the  facts  of  the  case 
to  which  they  are  to  be  applied,  is  matter  of  mutual  investigation 
and  decision,  in  order  to  prevent  an  erring  or  an  improper  exercise 
of  authority.  That  such  investigations  should  take  place,  not  be- 
fore the  assembled  members  of  a  society,  but  before  proper  and 
select  tribunals,  appears  not  only  an  obviously  proper,  but,  in  many 
respects,  a  necessary  regulation. 

The  trial  of  unworthy  Ministers  remains  to  be  noticed,  which 
wherever  a  number  of  religious  societies  exist  as  one  Church, 
having  therefore  many  Pastors,  is  manifestly  most  safely  placed  in 
the  hands  of  those  Pastors  themselves,  and  that  not  only  because 
the  official  acts  of  censure  and  exclusion  lie  with  them,  but  for 
other  reasons  also.  It  can  scarcely  happen  that  a  Minister  should 
be  under  accusation,  except  in  some  very  particular  cases,  but 
that,  from  his  former  influence,  at  least  with  a  part  of  the  people, 
some  faction  would  be  found  to  support  him.  In  proportion  to 
the  ardour  of  this  feeling,  the  other  party  would  be  excited  to 
undue  severity  and  bitterness.  To  try  such  a  case  before  a  whole 
society,  there  would  not  only  be  the  same  objection  as  in  the  case 
of  private  members  ;  but  the  additional  one,  that  parties  would  be 
more  certainly  formed,  and  be  still  more  violent.  If  he  must  be 
arraigned  then  before  some  special  tribunal,  the  most  fitting  is  that 
of  his  brethren,  provided  that  the  parties  accusing  have  the  right 
to  bring  on  such  a  trial  upon  exhibition  of  probable  evidence,  and 
to  prosecute  it  without  obstruction.  In  Churches  whose  Ministers 
are  thrown  solely  upon  the  public  opinion  of  the  society,  and  exist 
as  such  only  by  their  character,  this  is  ordinarily  a  sufficient  guard 
against  the  toleration  of  improper  conduct ;  whilst  it  removes  the 
trial  from  those  whose  excitement  for  or  against  the  accused  might 
on  either  side  be  unfavourable  to  fair  and  equitable  decision,  and 
to  the  peace  of  the  Church. 

The  above  remarks  contain  but  a  sketch  of  those  principles  of 
Church  government,  which  appear  to  be  contained  in,  or  to  be 
suggested  by,  the  New  Testament.     They  still  leave  much  liberty 


344  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  .  [PART 

to  Christians  to  adapt  them  in  detail  to  the  circumstances  in  which 
they  are  placed.  The  offices  to  be  created  ;  the  meetings  neces- 
sary for  the  management  of  the  various  affairs  of  the  Church., 
spiritual  and  financial ;  the  assembling  of  Ministers  in  larger  or 
smaller  numbers  for  counsel,  and  for  oversight  of  each  other,  and 
of  the  Churches  to  which  they  belong ;  are  all  matters  of  this  kind, 
and  are  left  to  the  suggestions  of  wisdom  and  piety.  The  extent 
to  which  distinct  societies  of  Christians  shall  associate  in  one  Church, 
under  a  common  government,  appears  also  to  be  a  matter  of  pru- 
dence and  of  circumstances.  In  the  primitive  Church  we  see 
different  societies  in  a  city  and  its  neighbourhood  under  the  common 
government  of  the  assembly  of  Presbyters  ;  and  afterwards  these 
grew  into  provincial  Churches,  of  greater  or  smaller  extent.  In 
modern  times,  we  have  similar  associations  in  the  form  of  national 
Churches,  Episcopal  or  Presbyterian ;  and  of  Churches  existing 
without  any  recognition  of  the  State  at  all,  and  forming  smaller  or 
larger  communities,  from  the  union  of  a  few  societies,  to  the  union 
of  societies  throughout  a  whole  country ;  holding  the  same  doc- 
trines, practising  the  same  modes  of  worship,  and  placing  them- 
selves under  a  common  code  of  laws  and  a  common  government. 
But  whatever  be  the  form  they  take,  they  are  bound  to  respect, 
and  to  model  themselves  by,  the  principles  of  Church  communion 
and  of  Church  discipline  which  are  contained  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment ;  and  they  will  be  fruitful  in  holiness  and  usefulness,  so  long 
as  they  conform  to  them,  and  so  long  as  those  forms  of  adminis- 
tration are  conscientiously  preferred  which  appear  best  adapted  to 
preserve  and  to  diffuse  sound  doctrine,  Christian  practice,  spiritual- 
ity, and  charity.  That  discipline  is  defective  and  bad  in  itself,  or  it 
is  ill  administered,  which  does  not  accomplish  these  ends  ;  and  that 
is  best  which  best  promotes  them. 

The  Ends  to  which  Church  authority  is  legitimately  directed 
remain  to  be  briefly  considered. 

The  first  is,  the  prcserv  ation  and  the  publication  of  "  sound 
doctrine."  Against  false  doctrines,  and  the  men  "  of  corrupt  minds''" 
who  taught  them,  the  sermons  of  Christ,  and  the  writings  of  the 
Apostles,  abound  in  cautions ;  and  since  St.  Paul  lays  it  down  as 
a  rule,  as  to  erring  teachers,  that  their  "  mouths  must  be  stopped," 
this  implies,  that  the  power  of  declaring  what  sound  doctrine  is,  and 
of  silencing  false  teachers,  was  confided  by  the  Apostles  to  the 
future  Church.  By  systematic  writers  <his  has  been  called  potestas 
do/fjiowixTj ;  which,  abused  by  the  ambition  of  man,  forms  no  small 
part  of  that  antichristian  usurpation  which  characterizes  the  Church 
of  Rome.   Extravagant  as  are  her  claims,  so  that  she  brings  in  her 


OURTH.'j  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  345 

traditions  as  of  equal  authority  with  the  inspired  writings,  and  denies 
to  men  the  right  of  private  judgment,  and  of  trying  her  dogmas  by 
the  test  of  the  Holy  Scriptures ;  there  is  a  sober  sense  in  which 
tfah  power  may  be  taken.  The  great  Protestant  principle,  that 
the  Holy  Scriptures  are  the  only  standard  of  doctrine  ;  that  the 
doctrines  of  every  Church  must  be  proved  out  of  them  ;  and  that 
to  this  standard  every  individual  member  has  the  right  of  bringing 
them,  in  order  to  the  confirmation  of  his  own  faith  ;  must  be  held 
inviolate,  if  we  would  not  see  Divine  authority  displaced  by  human, 
Since,  however,  men  may  come  to  different  conclusions  upon  the 
meaning  of  Scripture,  it  has  been  the  practice  from  primitive  times 
to  declare  the  sense  in  which  Scripture  is  understood  by  collective 
assemblies  of  Ministers,  and  by  the  Churches  united  with  them,  in 
order  to  the  enforcement  of  such  interpretations  upon  Christians 
generally,  by  the  iniUience  of  learning,  piety,  numbers,  and  solemn 
deliberation.  The  reference  of  the  question  respecting  circum- 
cision by  the  Church  at  Antioch  to  "  the  Apostles  and  Elders  at 
Jerusalem,"  is  the  first  instance  of  this,  though  with  this  peculiarity, 
that,  in  this  case,  the  decision  was  given  under  plenary  inspiration. 
Whilst  one  of  the  Apostles  lived,  an  appeal  could  be  made  to  him 
in  like  manner  when  any  doctrinal  novelty  sprung  up  in  the  Church 
After  their  death,  smaller  or  larger  Councils,  composed  of  the.. 
public  Teachers  of  the  Churches,  were  resorted  to,  that  they 
might  pronounce  upon  these  differences  of  opinion,  and  by  theii 
authority  confirm  the  faithful,  and  abash  the  propagators  of  error. 
Still  later,  four  Councils,  called  General,  from  the  number  of  per- 
sons assembled  in  them  from  various  parts  of  Christendom,  have 
peculiar  eminence.  The  Council  of  Nice,  in  the  fourth  century, 
which  condemned  the  Arian  heresy,  and  formed  that  scriptural 
and  important  formulary  called  the  Nicene  Creed ;  the  Council 
of  Constantinople,  held  at  the  end  of  the  same  century,  which 
condemned  the  errors  of  Macedonius,  and  asserted  the  divinity 
and  personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  the  Councils  of  Ephesus 
and  Chalcedon,  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  which  cen- 
sured the  opinions  of  Nestorius  and  Eutyches.  At  Nice  it  was 
declared  that  the  Son  is  truly  God,  of  the  same  substance  with  the 
Father ;  at  Constantinople,  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  also  truly  God  ; 
at  Ephesus,  that  the  Divine  nature  was  truly  united  to  the  human  in 
Christ,  in  one  person ;  at  Chalcedon,  that  both  natures  remained  dis- 
tinct, and  that  the  human  nature  was  not  lost  or  absorbed  in  the  Di- 
vine. The  decisions  of  these  Councils,  both  from  their  antiquity  and 
from  the  manifest  conformity  of  their  decisions  on  these  points  to  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  have  been  received  to  this  day  in  what  have  been 


34U  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

called  the  Orthodox  Churches,  throughout  the  world.  On  General 
Councils,  the  Romish  Church  has  been  divided  as  to  the  questionSy 
whether  infallibility  resides  in  them,  or  in  the  Pope,  or  in  the  Pope 
when  at  their  head.  Protestants  cut  this  matter  short  by  acknow- 
ledging that  they  have  erred,  and  may  err,  being  composed  of  fal- 
lible men,  and  that  they  have  no  authority  but  as  they  manifestly 
agree  with  the  Scriptures.  To  the  above-mentioned  Councils, 
they  have  in  general  always  paid  great  deference,  as  affording 
confirmation  of  the  plain  and  literal  sense  of  Scripture  on  the 
points  in  question ;  but  on  no  other  ground.  "  Things  ordained 
by  General  Councils  as  necessary  to  salvation,  have  neither 
strength  nor  authority,  unless  it  may  be  declared  they  be  taken 
out  of  Holy  Scripture."(6)  The  manner  in  which  the  respective 
Churches  of  the  Reformation  declared  their  doctrinal  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Scriptures  on  the  leading  points  of  theology,  was  by 
Confessions  and  Articles  of  Faith,  and  by  the  adoption  of  ancienr 
or  primitive  Creeds.  With  reference  to  this  practice,  no  doubt  it 
is,  that  the  Church  of  England  declares  in  her  twentieth  Article, 
that  "  the  Church  hath  authority  in  controversies  of  faith ;"  but 
qualifies  the  tenet,  by  adding,  "  and  yet  it  is  not  lawful  for  the 
Church  to  ordain  any  thing  that  is  contrary  to  God's  word  writ- 
ten ;"  in  which  there  is  a  manifest  recognition  of  the  right  of  all 
who  have  God's  word  in  their  hands,  to  make  use  of  it  in  order  to 
try  what  any  Church  "  ordains,"  as  necessary  to  be.  believed.  This 
authority  of  a  Church  in  matters  of  doctrine  appears  then  to  be 
reduced  to  the  following  particulars,  which,  although  directly  opposed 
to  the  assumptions  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  are  of  great  import- 
ance : — 1.  To  declare  the  sense  in  which  it  interprets  the  language 
of  Scripture  on  all  the  leading  doctrines  of  the  Christian  revela- 
tion ;  for  to  contend,  as  some  have  done,  that  no  creeds  or  articles 
of  faith  are  proper,  but  that  belief  in  the  Scriptures  only  ought  to 
be  required,  would  be  to  destroy  all  doctrinal  distinctions,  since 
the  most  perverse  interpreters  of  Scripture  profess  to  believe  the 
words  of  Scripture.  2.  To  require  from  all  its  members,  with 
whom  the  right  of  private  judgment  is  by  all  Protestant  Churches 
left  inviolate,  to  examine  such  declarations  of  faith,  professing  to 
convey  the  sense  of  Scripture,  with  modesty  and  proper  respect  to 
those  grave  and  learned  assemblies  in  which  all  these  points  have 
been  weighed  with  deliberation  ;  receiving  them  as  guides  to  truth, 
not  implicitly,  it  is  true,  but  still  with  docility  and  humility.  "Great 
weight  and  deference  is  due  to  such  decisions,  and  every  man  that 

(6)  Art.  21st  of  the  Church  of  England. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  o4? 

iincls  his  own  thoughts  differ  from  them,  ought  to  examine  the 
matter  over  again  with  much  attention  and  care,  freeing  himseli 
all  he  can  from  prejudice  and  obstinacy,  with  a  just  distrust  of  his 
own  understanding,  and  an  humble  respect  to  the  judgment  of  his 
superiors.  This  is  due  to  the  consideration  of  peace  and  union, 
and  to  that  authority  which  the  Church  has  to  maintain  it ;  but  if, 
after  all  possible  methods  of  inquiry,  a  man  cannot  master  his 
thoughts,  or  make  them  agree  with  the  public  decisions,  his  con- 
science is  not  under  bonds,  since  this  authority  is  not  absolute, 
nor  grounded  upon  a  promise  of  infallibility." (7)  3.  To  silence 
within  its  own  pale  the  preaching  of  all  doctrines  contrary  to  the 
received  standards.  On  this  every  Church  has  a  right  to  insist 
which  sincerely  believes  that  contrary  doctrines  to  its  own  arc 
fundamental  or  dangerous  errors,  and  which  is  thereby  bound 
both  to  keep  its  members  from  their  contamination,  and  also  to 
preserve  them  from  those  distractions  and  controversies  to  which 
the  preaching  of  diverse  doctrines  by  its  Ministers  would  inevitably 
lead.  Nor  is  there  any  thing  in  the  exercise  of  this  authority  con- 
trary to  Christian  liberty,  since  the  members  of  any  communion, 
and  especially  the  Ministers,  know  beforehand  the  terms  of  fellow- 
ship with  the  Churches  whose  confessions  of  faith  are  thus  made 
public  ;  and  because  also,  where  conscience  is  unfettered  by  public 
iaw,  they  are  neither  prevented  from  enjoying  their  own  opinions 
in  peace,  nor  from  propagating  them  in  other  assemblies. 

The  second  end  is,  the  forming  of  such  regulations  for  the  con- 
duct of  its  Ministers,  Officers,  and  Members,  as  shall  establish  ft 
common  order  for  worship  ;  facilitate  the  management  of  the  affairs 
of  the  community,  spiritual,  economical,  and  financial ;  and  give  a 
right  direction  to  the  general  conduct  of  the  whole  society.  This 
in  technical  language  is  called  potestas  oiaTa*™^  and  consists  in 
making  canons,  or  rules,  for  those  particular  matters  which  are  not 
provided  for  in  detail  by  the  directions  of  Scripture.  This  power 
also,  like  the  former,  has  been  carried  to  a  culpable  excess  in  many 
Churches,  so  as  to  fill  them  with  superstition,  and  in  many  respects 
to  introduce  an  onerous  system  of  observances,  like  that  of  Juda- 
ism, the  yoke  from  which  the  Gospel  has  set  us  free.  The  sim- 
plicity of  Christianity  has  thus  been  often  destroyed,  and  the  "doc- 
trines of  men"  set  up  "  as  commandments  of  God."  At  the  same 
time,  there  is  a  sound  sense  in  which  this  power  in  a  Church  must 
be  admitted,  and  a  deference  to  it  bound  upon  the  members.  For, 
when  the  laws  of  Christ  are  both  rightly  understood  and  cordially 
admitted,  the  application  of  them  to  particular  cases  is  still  neces- 

(7)  Burnet. 


348  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [»AB1 

sary ;  many  regulations  also  are  dictated  by  inference  and  by 
analogies,  and  often  appear  to  be  required  by  the  spirit  of  the 
Gospel,  for  which  there  is  no  provision  in  the  letter  of  Scrip- 
ture. The  obligation  of  public  worship,  for  instance,  is  plainly 
stated ;  but  the  seasons  of  its  observance,  its  frequency,  and  the 
mode  in  which  it  is  to  be  conducted,  must  be  matter  of  special 
regulation,  in  order  that  all  things  may  be  done  "  decently  and  in 
order."  The  observance  of  the  Sabbath  is  binding  ;  but  particular 
rules  guarding  against  such  acts,  as  in  the  judgment  of  a  Church, 
are  violations  of  the  law  of  the  Sabbath,  are  often  necessary  to 
direct  the  judgment  and  consciences  of  the  body  of  the  people. 
Baptism  is  to  be  administered ;  but  the  manner  of  this  service  may 
be  prescribed  by  a  Church,  since  the  Scriptures  have  not  deter- 
mined it.  So  also  as  to  the  mode  and  the  times  of  receiving  the 
Lord's  Supper,  in  the  same  absence  of  inspired  directions  regula- 
tions must  be  agreed  upon,  that  there  may  be,  as  nearly  as  edifi- 
cation requires,  an  undistracted  uniformity  of  practice.  Special 
festivals  of  commemoration  and  thanksgivings  may  also  be  ap- 
pointed, as  lit  occasions  for  the  inculcation  of  particular  truths. 
and  moral  duties,  and  for  the  special  excitement  of  grateful  affec- 
tions. For  although  they  are  not  particularly  prescribed  in  (Scrip- 
ture, they  are  in  manifest  accordance  with  its  spirit,  and  are  sanc- 
tioned by  many  of  the  examples  which  it  exhibits.  Days  of  fasting 
and  humiliation,  for  the  same  reasons,  may  be  the  subject  of  ap- 
pointment ;  and  beside  the  regular  acts  of  public  worship,  private 
meetings  of  the  members  for  mutual  prayer  and  religious  converse, 
may  also  be  found  necessary.  To  these  may  be  added,  various 
plans  for  the  instruction  of  children,  the  visitation  and  relief  of  the 
sick,  and  the  introduction  of  the  Gospel  into  neglected  neighbour- 
hoods, and  its  promotion  in  foreign  lands.  A  considerable  number 
of  other  regulations  touching  order,  contributions,  the  repressing 
of  particular  vices  which  may  mark  the  spirit  of  the  times,  and 
the  practice  of  particular  duties,  will  also  be  found  necessary. 

The  only  legitimate  ends,  however,  of  all  these  directions  and 
rules,  are,  the  edification  of  the  Church ;  the  preservation  of  its 
practical  purity ;  the  establishment  of  an  influential  order  and 
decorum  in  its  services ;  and  the  promotion  of  its  usefulness  to 
the  world.  The  general  principles  by  which  they  are  to  be  con- 
trolled, are  the  spirituality,  simplicity,  and  practical  character  of 
Christianity ;  and  the  authority  with  which  they  are  invested,  is 
derived  from  piety,  wisdom,  and  singleness  of  heart,  in  those  who 
originate  them,  and  from  that  docility  and  submissiveness  of  Chris- 
tians to  each  other,  which  is  enforced  upon  them  in  the  New 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  349 

Testament.  For  although  every  Christian  is  exhorted  to  "  try  all 
things,"  to  "search  the  Scriptures,"  and  to  exercise  his  best  judg- 
ment, in  matters  which  relate  to  doctrine,  discipline,  and  practice, 
yet  he  is  to  do  this  in  the  spirit  of  a  Christian ;  not  with  self  willed- 
ness,  and  self  confidence  ;  not  contemning  the  opinion  and  author- 
ity of  others ;  not  factiously  and  censoriously.  This  is  his  duty 
even  where  the  most  important  subjects  are  in  question  ;•  how 
much  more  then  in  things  comparatively  indifferent  ought  he  to 
practise  the  Apostolic  rule  : — "  Likewise,  ye  younger,  submit 
yourselves  unto  the  elder ;  yea,  all  of  you  be  subject  one  to 
another,  and  be  clothed  with  humility." 

The  third  end  of  Church  government  is  the  infliction  and  remo- 
val of  censures,  a  power  (potcstas  SiaxpiTur})  the  abuse  of  which, 
and  the  extravagant  lengths  to  which  it  has  been  carried,  have  led 
some  wholly  to  deny  it,  or  to  treat  it  slightly  ;  but  which  is  never- 
theless deposited  with  every  scriptural  Church.  Even  associations 
much  less  solemn  and  spiritual  in  their  character,  have  the  power 
to  put  away  their  members,  and  to  receive  again,  upon  certain 
conditions,  those  who  offend  against  their  rules  ;  and  if  the  offence 
which  called  forth  this  expulsion  be  of  a  moral  nature,  the  censure 
of  a  whole  society,  inflicted  after  due  examination,  comes  with 
imich  greater  weight,  and  is  a  much  greater  reproach  and  misfor- 
tune to  the  person  who  falls  under  it,  than  that  of  a  private  indi- 
vidual. In  the  case  of  a  Christian  Church,  however,  the  proceeding 
connects  itself  with  a  higher  than  human  authority.  The  members 
have  separated  from  the  world,  and  have  placed  themselves  under 
the  laws  of  Christ.  They  stand  in  a  special  relation  to  him,  so  long 
as  they  are  faithful ;  they  are  objects  of  his  care  and  love,  as  mem- 
bers of  his  own  body  ;  and  to  them,  as  such,  great  and  numerous 
promises  are  made.  To  preserve  them  in  this  state  of  fidelity,  to 
guard  them  from  errors  of  doctrine  and  viciousness  of  practice, 
and  thus  to  prevent  their  separation  from  Christ,  the  Church  with 
its  ministry,  its  ordinances,  and  its  discipline,  was  established.  He 
who  becomes  unfaithful  in  opposition  to  the  influence  of  those 
edifying  and  conservatory  means,  forfeits  the  favour  of  Christ,  even 
before  he  is  deservedly  separated  from  the  Church  ;  but  when  he 
is  separated,  put  away,  denied  communion  with  the  Church,  he 
loses  also  the  benefit  of  all  those  peculiar  means  of  grace  and  sal- 
vation, and  of  those  special  influences  and  promises  which  Christ 
bestows  upon  the  Church.  He  is  not  only  thrown  back  upon 
common  society  with  shame,  stigmatized  as  an  "  evil  worker,"  by 
the  solemn  sentence  of  a  religious  tribunal ;  but  becomes,  so  to 
speak,  again  a  member  of  that  incorporated  and  hostile  societv. 

Vol.  III.  38 


350  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

the  world,  against  which  the  exclusive  and  penal  sentences  of 
the  word  of  God  are  directed.  Where  the  sentence  of  excision  by 
a  Church  is  erring  or  vicious,  as  it  may  be  in  some  cases,  it  cannot 
affect  an  innocent  individual ;  he  would  remain,  notwithstanding 
the  sentence  of  men,  a  member  of  Christ's  invisible  universal 
Church ;  but  when  it  proceeds  upon  a  just  application  of  the 
laws  of  Christ,  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  its  ratification  in  heaven, 
although  the  door  is  left  open  to  penitence  and  restoration. 

In  proportion,  however,  as  a  sober  and  serious  Christian,  having 
those  views,  wishes  to  keep  up  in  his  own  mind,  and  in  the  minds 
of  others,  a  proper  sense  of  the  weight  and  solemnity  of  Church 
censures  when  rightly  administered,  he  will  feel  disgusted  at  those 
assumptions  of  control  over  the  mercy  and  justice  of  God,  which 
fallible  men  have  in  some  Churches  endeavoured  to  establish,  and 
have  too  often  exercised  for  the  gratification  of  the  worst  passions. 
So  because  our  Lord  said  to  Peter,  "  I  will  give  unto  thee  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  and  "  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind 
on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose 
on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven,"  which  is  also  said  Matt,  xviii, 
1 8,  to  all  the  Apostles,  "  it  came  to  be  understood  that  the  sentence 
of  excommunication,  by  its  own  intrinsic  authority,  condemned  to 
eternal  punishment ;  that  the  excommunicated  person  could  not 
be  delivered  from  this  condemnation,  unless  the  Church  gave  him 
absolution  ;  and  that  the  Church  had  the  power  of  absolving  him 
upon  the  private  confession  of  his  fault,  either  by  prescribing  to 
him  certain  acts  of  penance,  and  works  of  charity,  the  performance 
of  which  was  considered  as  a  satisfaction  for  the  sin  which  he  had 
committed,  or  by  applying  to  him  the  merits  of  some  other  person, 
And  as  in  the  progress  of  corruption,  the  whole  power  of  the 
Church  was  supposed  to  be  lodged  in  the  Pope,  there  flowed  from 
him,  at  his  pleasure,  indulgences  or  remissions  of  some  parts  of  the 
penance,  absolutions,  and  pardons,  the  possession  of  which  was 
represented  to  Christians  as  essential  to  salvation,  and  the  sale  of 
which  formed  a  most  gainful  traffic." 

As  to  the  passage  respecting  the  gift  of  the  Keys  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  to  Peter,  from  which  these  views  affect  to  be 
derived,  it  is  most  naturally  explained  by  the  very  apposite  and 
obviously  explanatory  fact,  that  this  Apostle  was  the  first  preacher 
of  the  Gospel  dispensation  in  its  perfected  form,  both  to  the  Jews 
at  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  afterwards  to  the  Gentiles.  Bishop 
Horsley  applies  it  only  to  the  latter  of  these  events,  to  which 
indeed  it  may  principally,  but  not  exclusively,  refer. 

"  St.  Peter's  custody  of  the  keys  was  a  temporary,  not  a  per- 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  351 

petual  authority :  its  object  was  not  individuals,  but  the  whole 
human  race.  The  kingdom  of  heaven  upon  earth  is  the  true 
Church  of  God.  It  is  now  therefore  the  Christian  Church : 
formerly  the  Jewish  Church  was  that  kingdom.  The  true  Church 
is  represented  in  this  text,  as  in  many  passages  of  Holy  Writ 
under  the  image  of  a  walled  city,  to  be  entered  only  at  the  gates. 
Under  the  Mosaic  economy  these  gates  were  shut,  and  particular 
persons  only  could  obtain  admittance, — Israelites  by  birth,  or  by 
legal  incorporation.  The  locks  of  these  gates  were  the  rites  of 
the  Mosaic  law,  which  obstructed  the  entrance  of  aliens.  But. 
after  our  Lord's  ascension,  and  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
the  keys  of  the  city  were  given  to  St.  Peter,  by  that  vision  which 
taught  him,  and  authorized  him  to  teach  others,  that  all  distinc- 
tions of  one  nation  from  another  were  at  an  end.  By  virtue  of 
this  special  commission,  the  great  Apostle  applied  the  key,  pushed 
back  the  bolt  of  the  lock,  and  threw  the  gates  of  the  city  open  for 
the  admission  of  the  whole  Gentile  world,  in  the  instance  of  Cor- 
nelius and  his  family." (8) 

When  the  same  learned  Prelate  would  also  refer  the  binding  and 
loosing  power  mentioned  in  the  above  texts  exclusively  to  Peter, 
he  forgets  that  in  the  passage  above  referred  to,  Matt,  xviii,  18,  it 
is  given  to  all  the  Apostles,  "  Whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth 
shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth 
shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  These  expressions  manifestly  refer  to 
the  authoritative  declaration  of  any  thing  to  be  obligatory,  and  its 
infraction  to  be  sinful,  and  therefore  subject  to  punishment,  or  the 
contrary ;  and  the  passage  receives  sufficient  illustration  from  the 
words  of  our  Lord  to  his  Apostles,  after  his  resurrection,  when 
after  breathing  upon  them  he  said,  "  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost : 
whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted  to  them ;  and  whose- 
soever sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained,"  John  xx,  22,  23.  To 
qualify  them  for  this  authoritative  declaration  of  what  was  obliga- 
tory upon  men,  or  otherwise  ;  and  of  the  terms  upon  which  sins 
are  "  remitted,"  and  the  circumstances  under  which  they  are 
•'  retained  ;"  they  previously  received  the  Holy  Ghost, — a  sufficient 
proof  that  this  power  was  connected  with  the  plenary  inspiration 
of  the  Apostles ;  and  beyond  those  inspired  men  it  could  not 
extend,  unless  equally  strong  miraculous  evidence  of  the  same 
degree  of  inspiration  were  afforded  by  any  others.  The  manner 
also  in  which  the  Apostles  exercised  this  power  elucidates  the 
subject.    We  have  no  instance  at  all  of  their  forgiving  the  sins  ol 

(ft)  Horsley's  Sermons. 


352  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

any  individuals  ;  they  merely  proclaimed  the  terms  of  pardon.  And 
we  have  no  instance  of  their  "  retaining"  the  sins  of  any  one, 
except  by  declaring  them  condemned  by  the  laws  of  the  Gospel, 
of  which  they  were  the  preachers.  They  authoritatively  explain 
in  their  writings  the  terms  of  forgiveness ;  they  state  as  to  duty 
what  is  obligatory,  and  what  is  not  obligatory,  upon  Christians ; 
they  pronounce  sinners  of  various  kinds,  impenitent  and  unbe- 
lieving,  to  be  under  God's  wrath ;  and  they  declare  certain  apos- 
tates to  be  put  beyond  forgiveness  by  their  own  act,  not  b) 
Apostolic  excommunication ;  and  thus  they  bind  and  loose,  remit 
sins  and  retain  them.  The  meaning  of  these  passages  is  in  this 
manner  explained  by  the  practice  of  the  Apostles  themselves,  and 
we  may  also  see  the  reason  why  in  Matthew  xviii,  a  similar  decla- 
ration stands  connected  with  the  censures  of  a  Church  :  "  More- 
over, if  thy  brother  trespass  against  thee,  go  and  tell  him  his  fault 
between  thee  and  him  alone  ;  if  he  shall  hear  thee,  thou  hast  gained 
thy  brother.  But  if  he  will  not  hear  thee,  then  take  with  thee  one 
or  two  more,  that  in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  every 
word  may  be  established.  And  if  he  shall  neglect  to  hear  them, 
tell  it  unto  the  Church  ;  but  if  he  neglect  to  hear  the  Church,  let 
him  be  unto  thee  as  a  heathen  man  and  as  a  publican ;  verily,  I 
say  unto  you,  whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound 
in  heaven,  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed 
in  heaven." 

That  here  there  may  be  a  reference  to  a  provision  made  among 
the  Jews  for  settling  questions  of  accusation  and  dispute  by  the 
Elders  of  their  synagogues,  is  probable ;  but  it.  is  also  clear  that 
our  Lord  looked  forward  to  the  establishment  of  his  own  Church, 
which  was  to  displace  the  synagogue ;  and  that  there  might  be 
infallible  rules  to  guide  that  Church  in  its  judgment  on  mora? 
cases,  he  turns  to  the  disciples,  to  whom  the  discourse  is  addressed, 
and  says  to  them,  "  Whatsoever  ye,"  not  the  Church,  "  shall  bind 
on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose 
on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  Of  the  disciples  then  present 
the  subsequent  history  leads  us  to  conclude,  that  he  principally 
meant  that  the  Apostles  should  be  endued  with  this  power,  and 
that  they  were  to  be  the  inspired  persons  who  were  to  furnish  "the 
Church"  with  infallible  rules  of  judgment,  in  all  such  cases  of  dis- 
pute  and  accusation.  When,  therefore,  any  Church  rightly  inter- 
prets these  Apostolic  rules,  and  rightly  applies  them  to  particular 
cases,  it  then  exercises  a  discipline  which  is  not  only  approved, 
but  is  also  confirmed,  in  heaven  by  the  concurring  dispensations  of 
God,  who  respects  his  own  inspirations  in  his  Apostles,   The  whole 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  353 

shows  the  careful  and  solemn  manner  in  which  all  such  investiga- 
tions are  to  be  conducted,  and  the  serious  effect  of  them.  It  is  by 
the  admonishing  and  putting  away  of  offenders,  that  the  Church 
bears  its  testimony  against  all  sin  before  the  world  ;  and  it  is  thus^ 
that  she  maintains  a  salutary  influence  over  her  members,  by  the 
well-grounded  fear  of  those  censures  which,  when  scripturally 
administered,  are  sanctioned  by  Christ  its  Head  ;  and  which,  when 
they  extend  to  excision  from  the  body,  and  no  error  of  judgment, 
or  sinister  intention,  vitiates  the  proceeding,  separates  the  offenders 
from  that  special  grace  of  Christ  which  is  promised  to  the  faithful 
collected  into  a  Church  state, — a  loss,  an  evil,  and  a  danger, 
which  nothing  but  repentance,  humiliation,  and  a  return  to  God 
and  his  people,  can  repair.  For  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  this  part 
of  discipline  is  an  ordinance  of  Christ,  not  only  for  the  maintenance 
of  the  character  of  his  Churches,  and  the  preservation  of  their 
influence  in  the  world  ;  but  for  the  spiritual  benefit  of  the  offend- 
ers themselves.  To  this  effect  are  the  words  of  the  Apostle  Paul 
as  to  the  immoral  Corinthian, — "  to  deliver  such  a  one  to  Satan, 
for  the  destruction  of  the  flesh"  the  dominion  of  his  bodily  appe- 
tites, "  that  the  spirit  may  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus." 
The  practice  of  many  of  the  ancient  Churches  was,  in  this  respect, 
rigid  ;  in  several  of  the  circumstances  far  too  much  so  ;  and  thus  it 
assumed  a  severity  much  more  appalling  than  in  the  Apostolic  times. 
It  shows,  however,  how  deeply  the  necessity  of  maintaining  moral 
discipline  was  felt  among  them,  and  in  substance,  though  not  in 
every  part  of  the  mode,  is  worthy  of  remembrance.  "  When  dis- 
ciples of  Christ  who  had  dishonoured  bis  religion  by  committing 
any  gross  immorality,  or  by  relapsing  into  idolatry,  were  cut  off 
:Vom  the  Church  by  the  sentence  of  excommunication ;  they  were 
kept,  often  for  years,  in  a  state  of  penance,  however  desirous  to 
be  re-admitted.  They  made  a  public  confession  of  their  faith, 
accompanied  with  the  most  humiliating  expressions  of  grief.  For 
some  time  they  stood  without  the  doors,  while  the  Christians  were 
employed  in  worship.  Afterwards  they  were  allowed  to  enter ; 
then  to  stand  during  a  part  of  the  service  ;  then  to  remain  during 
the  whole  :  but  they  were  not  permitted  to  partake  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  till  a  formal  absolution  was  pronounced  by  the  Church.  The 
time  of  the  penance  was  sometimes  shortened,  when  the  anguish 
of  their  mind,  or  any  occasional  distress  of  body,  threatened  the 
danger  of  their  dying  in  that  condition,  or  when  those  who  were 
then  suffering  persecution,  or  other  deserving  members  of  the 
Church,  interceded  for  them,  and  became,  by  this  intercession, 
in  some  measure,  sureties  for  their  future  good  behaviour.     The 

38* 


354  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PARI 

duration  of  the  penance,  the  acts  required  while  it  continued*  and 
the  manner  of  the  absolution,  varied  at  different  times.  The  mat- 
ter was,  from  its  nature,  subject  to  much  abuse  ;  it  was  often  taken 
under  the  cognizance  of  ancient  Councils ;  and  a  great  part  of 
their  canons  was  employed  in  regulating  the  exercise  of  dis- 
cipline."^) 

In  concluding  this  Chapter,  it  may  be  observed,  that  however 
difficult  it  may  be,  in  some  cases,  to  adjust  modes  of  Church 
government,  so  that,  in  the  view  of  all,  the  principles  of  the  New 
Testament  may  be  fully  recognised,  and  the  ends  for  which 
Churches  are  collected  may  be  effectually  accomplished,  this 
labour  will  always  be  greatly  smoothed,  by  a  steady  regard,  on 
each  side,  to  duties  as  well  as  to  rights.  These  are  equally  impera- 
tive upon  Ministers,  upon  subordinate  officers,  and  upon  the  private 
members  of  every  Church.  Charity,  candour,  humility,  public 
spirit,  zeal,  a  forgiving  spirit,  and  the  desire,  the  strong  desire,  of 
unity  and  harmony,  ought  to  pervade  all,  as  well  as  a  constant 
remembrance  of  the  great  and  solemn  truth,  that  Christ  is  the 
Judge,  as  well  as  the  Saviour,  of  his  Churches.  Whilst  the  people 
are  docile  ;  obedient  to  the  word  of  exhortation  ;  willing  to  submit. 
N'  in  the  Lord,"  to  those  who  "preside  over  them,"  and  are  charged 
to  exercise  Christ's  discipline  ;  and  whilst  Ministers  are  "  gentle 
among  them,"  after  the  example  of  St.  Paul, — a  gentleness,  how- 
ever, which,  in  his  case,  winked  at  no  evil,  and  kept  back  no  truth, 
and  compromised  no  principle,  and  spared  no  obstinate  and  incu- 
rable offender, — whilst  they  feed  the  flock  of  Christ  with  sound 
doctrine,  and  are  intent  upon  their  edification,  watching  over  them 
"  as  they  that  must  give  account,"  and  study,  live,  and  labour,  for 
no  other  ends,  than  to  present  that  part  of  the  Church  committed 
to  their  care  "  perfect  in  Christ  Jesus ;"  every  Church  will  fall 
as  it  were  naturally  and  without,  effort  into  its  proper  "order." 
Pure  and  undefiled  religion  in  Churches,  like  the  first  poetry, 
creates  those  subordinate  rules  by  which  it  is,  afterwards,  guarded 
and  governed ;  and  the  best  canons  of  both  are  those  which  are 
dictated  by  the  fresh  and  primitive  effusions  of  their  own  inspiration 

(0)  Hill's  Lecture*. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  .555 

CHAPTER  II. 

Institutions  op  Christianity. — The  Sacraments. 

The  number  of  Sacraments  is  held  by  all  Protestants  to  be  but 
two, — Baptism,  and  the  Lord's  Supper ;  because  they  find  no  other 
instituted  in  the  New  Testament,  or  practised  in  the  early  Church. 
The  superstition  of  the  Church  of  Rome  has  added  no  fewer  than 
live  to  the  number, — Confirmation,  Penance,  Orders,  Matrimony* 
and  Extreme  Unction. 

The  word  used  by  the  Greek  Fathers  for  sacrament  was 
wtfrypiov.  In  the  New  Testament  this  word  always  means,  as 
Campbell  has  showed,  either  a  secret, — something  unknown  till 
revealed ;  or  the  spiritual  meaning  of  some  emblem  or  type.  In 
both  these  senses  it  is  rendered  sacramentum  in  the  Vulgate  trans- 
lation, which  shows  that  the  latter  word  was  formerly  used  in  a 
large  signification.  As  the  Greek  term  was  employed  in  the  New 
Testament  to  express  the  hidden  meaning  of  an  external  symbol, 
as  in  Revelation  i,  20,  "  the  mystery  of  the  seven  stars,"  it  was 
naturally  applied  by  early  Christians  to  the  symbolical  rite  of  the 
Lord's  Supper';  and  as  some  of  the  most  sacred  and  retired  parts 
of  the  ancient  heathen  worship  were  called  mysteries,  from  which 
all  but  the  initiated  were  excluded,  the  use  of  the  same  term  to 
designate  that  most  sacred  act  of  Christian  worship,  which  was 
strictly  confined  to  the  approved  members  of  the  Church,  was 
probably  thought  peculiarly  appropriate.  The  Latin  word  sacra- 
mentum, in  its  largest  sense,  may  signify  a  sacred  ceremony ;  and 
is  the  appellation,  also,  of  the  military  oath  of  fidelity,  taken  by  the 
Roman  soldiers.  For  both  these  reasons,  probably,  the  term 
sacrament  was  adopted  by  the  Latin  Christians.  For  the  first, 
because  of  the  peculiar  sacredness  of  the  Lord's  Supper  ;  and  for 
the  second,  because  of  that  engagement  to  be  faithful  to  the  com- 
mands of  Christ,  their  heavenly  Leader,  which  was  implied  in  this 
ordinance,  and  impressed  upon  them  by  so  sacred  a  solemnity. 
It  was,  perhaps,  from  the  designation  of  this  ordinance,  by  the 
term  sacramentum,  by  the  Christians  whom  Pliny  examined  as  to 
their  faith  and  modes  of  worship,  that  he  thus  expresses  himself  in 
his  letter  to  the  Emperor  Trajan  : — "  From  their  affirmations  I 
learned  that  the  sum  of  all  their  offence,  call  it  fault  or  error,  was, 
that  on  a  day  fixed  they  used  to  assemble  before  sunrise,  and  sing 


■loii  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

together,  in  alternate  responses,  hymns  to  Christ,  as  a  Deity ; 
binding  themselves  by  the  solemn  engagements  of  an  oath,  not  to 
commit  any  manner  of  wickedness,"  &c.  The  term  sacrament 
was  also  at  an  early  period  given  to  Baptism,  as  well  as  to  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord,  and  is  now  confined  among  Protestants  to 
these  two  ordinances  only.  The  distinction  between  sacraments, 
and  other  religious  rites,  is  well  stated  by  Burnet : — (1) 

"This  difference  is  to  be  put  between  sacraments  and  other 
ritual  actions ;  that  whereas  other  rites  are  badges  and  distinctions 
by  which  Christians  are  known,  a  sacrament  is  more  than  a  bare 
matter  of  form ;  as  in  the  Old  Testament,  circumcision  and  pro- 
pitiatory sacrifices  were  things  of  a  different  nature  and  order  from 
all  the  other  ritual  precepts  concerning  their  cleansings,  the  dis- 
tinctions of  days,  places,  and  meats.  These  were,  indeed,  precepts 
given  them  of  God ;  but  they  were  not  federal  acts  of  renewing 
the  covenant,  or  reconciling  themselves  to  God.  By  circumcision 
they  received  the  seal  of  the  covenant,  and  were  brought  under 
the  obligation  of  the  whole  law  ;  they  were  made  by  it  debtors  to 
it ;  and  when  by  their  sins  they  had  provoked  God's  wrath,  they 
were  reconciled  to  him  by  their  sacrifices,  with  which  atonement 
was  made,  and  so  their  sins  were  forgiven  them ;  the  nature  and 
end  of  those  was,  to  be  federal  acts,  in  the  offering  of  which  the 
Jews  kept  to  their  part  of  the  covenant,  and  in  the  accepting  of 
which  God  maintained  it  on  his  part ;  so  we  see  a  plain  difference- 
between  these  and  a  mere  rite,  which,  though  commanded,  yet 
must  pass  only  for  the  badge  of  a  profession,  as  the  doing  of  it  is 
an  act  of  obedience  to  a  Divine  law.  Now,  in  the  new  dispensa- 
tion, though  our  Saviour  has  eased  us  of  that  law  of  ordinances. 
that  grievous  yoke,  and  those  beggarly  elements,  which  were  laid 
upon  the  Jews ;  yet  since  we  are  still  in  the  body  subject  to  our 
senses,  and  to  sensible  things,  he  has  appointed  some  federal 
actions  to  be  both  the  visible  stipulations  and  professions  of  our 
Christianity,  and  the  conveyancers  to  us  of  the  blessings  of  the 
Gospel." 

It  is  this  view  of  the  two  sacraments,  as  federal  acts,  which 
sweeps  away  the  five  superstitious  additions  that  the  temerity  of 
the  Church  of  Rome  has  dared  to  elevate  to  the  same  rank  of 
sacredness  and  importance. 

As  it  is  usual  among  men  to  confirm  covenants  by  visible  and 
solemn  forms,  and  has  been  so  from  the  most  ancient  times,  so 
when  Almighty  God  was  pleased  to  enter  into  covenant  engage- 

(1)  On  the  Articles. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  357 

ments  with  men,  he  condescended  to  the  same  methods  of  afford- 
ing, on  his  part,  sensible  assurances  of  his  fidelity,  and  to  require 
the  same  from  them.  Thus,  circumcision  was  the  sign  and  seal 
of  the  covenant  with  Abraham  ;  and  when  the  great  covenant  of 
grace  was  made  in  the  Son  of  God  with  all  nations,  it  was  agree- 
able to  this  analogy  to  expect  that  he  would  institute  some  con- 
stantly-recurring visible  sign,  in  confirmation  of  his  mercy  to  us, 
which  should  encourage  our  reliance  upon  his  promises,  and  have 
the  force  of  a  perpetual  renewal  of  the  covenant  between  the 
parties.  Such  is  manifestly  the  character  and  ends  both  of  the 
Institution  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper ;  but  as  to  the  five 
additional  sacraments  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  "  they  have  not 
any  visible  sign  or  ceremony  ordained  of  God," (2)  and  they  stand 
in  no  direct  connexion  with  any  covenant,  engagement  entered 
into  by  him  with  his  creatures.  Conjinnation  rests  on  no  scriptural 
authority  at  all.  Penance,  if  it  mean  any  thing  more  than  repent- 
ance, is  equally  unsanctioned  by  Scripture  ;  and  if  it  mean  "  repent- 
ance toward  God,"  it  is  no  more  a  sacrament  than  faith.  Orders, 
or  the  ordination  of  Ministers,  is  an  Apostolic  command,  but  has  in 
it  no  greater  indication  of  a  sacramental  act  than  any  other  such 
command, — say  the  excommunication  of  obstinate  sinners  from 
the  Church,  which,  with  just  as  good  a  reason,  might  be  elevated 
into  a  sacrament.  Marriage  appears  to  have  been  made  by  the 
Papists,  a  sacrament  for  this  curious  reason,  that  the  Apostle  Paul, 
when  speaking  of  the  love  and  union  of  husband  and  wife,  and 
taking  occasion  from  that  to  allude  to  the  love  of  Christ  to  his 
Church,  says,  "  This  is  a  great  mystery,"  which  the  Vulgate  version 
translates,  "Sacramejntum  hoc  magnum  est :"  Thus  they  confound 
the  large  and  the  restricted  sense  of  the  word  sacrament,  and  forget 
that  the  true  "  mystery"  spoken  of  by  the  Apostle,  lies  not  in  mar- 
riage, but  in  the  union  of  Christ  with  his  people, — "  This  is  a  great 
mystery,  but  I  speak  concerning  Christ  and  the  Church."  If,  how- 
ever, the  use  of  the  word  "  mystery"  in  this  passage  by  St.  Paul, 
were  sufficient  to  prove  marriage  a  sacrament,  then  the  calling  of 
the  Gentiles,  as  Beza  observes,  might  be  the  eighth  sacrament, 
sinee  St.  Paul  terms  that  "  a  mystery,"  Eph.  i,  9,  which  the  Vul- 
gate, in  like  manner,  translates  by  "  sacramentum."  The  last  of 
their  sacraments  is  Extreme  Unction,  of  which  it  is  enough  to  say, 
that  it  is  no  where  prescribed  in  Scripture ;  and  if  it  were,  has 
clearly  nothing  in  it  of  a  sacramental  character.  The  passage  in 
3fc  James's  Epistle  to  which  they  refer,  cannot  serve  them  at  all ; 

(2)  Article  25th  of  the  Church  of  England. 


358  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

for  the  Romanists  use  extreme  unction  only  when  all  hope  of  reco- 
very is  past,  whereas  the  prayers  and  the  anointing"  mentioned  by 
St.  James  were  resorted  to  in  order  to  a  miraculous  cure,  for  life, 
and  not  for  death.  With  them,  therefore,  extreme  unction  is  called 
"  the  sacrament  of  the  dying-." 

Of  the  nature  of  sacraments  there  are  three  leading  views. 

The  first  is  that  taken  by  the  Church  of  Rome. 

According-  to  the  doctrine  of  this  Church,  the  sacraments  con- 
tain the  grace  they  signify,  and  confer  grace,  ex  opere  operate,  by 
the  work  itself,  upon  such  as  do  not  put  an  obstruction  by  mortal 
sin.  "  For  these  sensible  and  natural  things,"  it  is  declared,  "work 
by  the  almighty  power  of  God  in  the  sacraments  what  they  could 
not  do  by  their  own  power."  Nor  is  any  more  necessary  to  this 
effect,  than  that  the  Priests,  "who  make  and  consecrate  the  sacra- 
ments, have  an  intention  of  doing  what  the  Church  doth,  and  dotb 
intend  to  do." (3)  According  therefore  to  this  doctrine,  the  matter 
of  the  sacrament  derives  from  the  action  of  the  Priest,  in  pro- 
nouncing certain  words,  a  Divine  virtue,  provided  it  be  the  intention 
of  the  Priest  to  give  to  that  matter  such  a  Divine  virtue,  and  this 
grace  is  conveyed  to  the  soul  of  every  person  who  receives  it.  Nor 
is  it  required  of  the  person  receiving  a  sacrament,  that  he  should 
exercise  any  good  disposition,  or  possess  faith ;  for  such  is  con- 
ceived to  be  the  physical  virtue  of  a  sacrament,  that,  except  when 
opposed  by  the  obstacle  of  a  mortal  sin,  the  act  of  receiving  it  is 
alone  sufficient  for  the  experience  of  its  efficacy.  This  is  so  capital 
an  article  of  faith  with  the  Romish  Church;  that  the  Council  of 
Trent  anathematizes  all  who  deny  that  grace  is  not  conferred  by 
the  sacraments  from  the  act  itself  of  receiving  them,  and  affirm  thai 
faith  only  in  the  Divine  promises  is  sufficient  to  the  obtaining  of 
grace,-r-"  Se  quis  dixerit,  per  ipsa  nova  legis  sacramenta,  ex  operc 
operato,  non  conferri  graliam,  sed  solum  fidem  divince  promissionis  ad 
gratiam  consequendam  sujficere,  anathema  s?L"(4)  It  is  on  this 
ground  also,  that  the  members  of  that  Church  argue  the  supe- 
riority of  the  sacraments  of  the  New  Testament  to  those  of  the 
Old  ;  the  latter  having  been  effectual  only  ex  opere  operantis,  from 
the  piety  and  faith  of  the  persons  receiving  them,  whilst  the  former 
confer  grace  ex  opere  operato,  from  their  own  intrinsic  virtue,  and 
an  immediate  physical  influence  upon  the  mind  of  the  receiver. 

The  first  great  objection  to  this  statement  is,  that  it  has  even  no 
pretence  of  authority  from  Scripture,  and  grounds  itself  whollx 
upon  the  alleged  traditions  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  which,  in  fact, 

(3)  Cone.  Trid.  Can.  11.  (4)  Cone.  Trid.  Scss.  vii,  Can.  S. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  350 

are  just  what  successive  inventors  of  superstitious  practices  have 
thought  proper  to  make  them.  The  second  is,  that  it  is  decidedly 
anti-scriptural ;  for  as  the  only  true  notion  of  a  sacrament  is,  that 
it  is  the  sign  and  seal  of  a  covenant ;  and  as  the  saving  benefits  of 
the  covenant  of  grace  are  made  expressly  to  depend  upon  a  true 
faith  ;  the  condition  of  grace  being  made  by  the  Church  of  Rome 
the  act  of  receiving  a  sacrament  independent  of  true  faith,  she 
impudently  rejects  the  great  condition  of  salvation  as  laid  down  in 
God's  word,  and  sets  up  in  its  place  another  of  an  opposite  kind 
by  mere  human  authority.  The  third  is,  that  it  debases  an  ordi- 
nance of  God  from  a  rational  service  into  a  mere  charm,  discon- 
nected with  every  mental  exercise,  and  working  its  effect  physically, 
and  not  morally.  The  fourth  is  its  licentious  tendency ;  for  as  a 
very  large  class  of  sins  is  by  the  Romish  Church  allowed  to  be 
venial,  and  nothing  but  a  mortal  sin  can  prevent  the  recipient  of 
the  sacrament  from  receiving  the  grace  of  God  ;  men  may  live  in 
the  practice  of  all  these  venial  offences,  and  consequently  in  an 
unrenewed  habit  of  soul,  and  yet  be  assured  of  the  Divine  favour, 
and  of  eternal  salvation  ;  thus  again  boldly  contradicting  the  whole 
tenor  of  the  New  Testament.  Finally,  whatever  privileges  the 
sacraments  are  designed  to  confer,  all  of  them  are  made  by  this 
doctrine  to  depend,  not  upon  the  state  of  the  receiver's  mind,  but 
upon  the  "  intention"  of  the  administrator,  who,  if  not  intending  to 
impart  the  physical  virtue  to  the  elements,  renders  the  sacrament 
of  no  avail  to  the  recipient,  although  he  performs  all  the  external 
acts  of  the  ceremony. 

The  opposite  opinion  to  this  gross  and  unholy  doctrine  is  that 
maintained  by  Socinus,  and  adopted  generally  by  his  followers : 
to  which  also  the  notions  of  some  orthodox  Protestants  have  too 
carelessly  leaned.  The  view  taken  on  the  subject  of  the  sacra- 
ments by  such  persons  is,  that  they  differ  not  essentially  from  other 
rites  and  ceremonies  of  religion  ;  but  that  their  peculiarity  consists 
in  their  emblematic  character,  under  which  they  represent  what  is 
spiritual  and  invisible,  and  arc  memorials  of  past  events.  Their 
sole  use  therefore  is  to  cherish  pious  sentiments,  by  leading  the 
mind  to  such  meditations  as  arc  adapted  to  excite  them.  Some 
also  add,  that  they  are  the  badges  of  a  Christian  profession,  and 
the  instituted  means  by  which  Christians  testify  their  faith  in 
Christ. 

The  fault  of  the  Popish  opinion  is  superstitious  excess ;  the  fault 
of  the  latter  scheme  is  that  of  defect.  The  sacraments  are  emblem- 
atical ;  they  are  adapted  to  excite  pious  sentiments ;  they  are 
memorials,  at  least  the  Lord's  Supper  bears  this  character ;  they 


360  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

are  badges  of  profession  ;  they  are  the  appointed  means  for 
declaring  our  faith  in  Christ ;  and  so  far  is  this  view  superior  to 
the  Popish  doctrine,  that  it  elevates  the  sacraments  from  the  base 
and  degrading  character  of  a  charm  and  incantation,  to  that  of  a 
spiritual  and  reasonable  service,  and  instead  of  making  them  sub- 
stitutes for  faith  and  good  works,  renders  them  subservient  to  both. 

But  if  the  sacraments  are  federal  rites,  that  is,  if  they  are  cove- 
nant transactions,  they  must  have  a  more  extensive  and  a  deeper 
import  than  this  view  of  the  subject  conveys.  If  circumcision  was 
"a  token,"  and  "a  seal"  of  the  covenant  by  which  God  engaged 
to  justify  men  by  faith,  then,  as  we  shall  subsequently  show,  since 
Christian  baptism  came  in  its  place,  it  has  precisely  the  same- 
office  ;  if  the  passover  was  a  sign,  a  pledge  or  seal,  and  subse- 
quently a  memorial,  then  these  characters  will  belong  to  the  Lord's 
Supper ;  the  relation  of  which  to  the  "New  Testament,"  or  Cove- 
nant, "  in  the  blood"  of  our  Saviour,  is  expressly  stated  by  himself. 
What  is  the  import  of  the  terms  Sign  and  Seal,  will  be  hereafter 
considered ;  but  it  is  enough  here  to  suggest  them,  to  show  that 
the  second  opinion  above  stated  loses  sight  of  these  peculiarities, 
and  is  therefore  defective. 

The  third  opinion  may  be  stated  in  the  words  of  the  formularies 
of  several  Protestant  Churches. 

The  Heidelberg  Catechism  has  the  following  question  and 
reply  :— 

"  What  are  the  sacraments  ?" 

"  They  are  holy  visible  signs  and  seals  ordained  by  God  for 
this  end,  that  He  may  more  fully  declare  and  seal  by  them  the 
promise .  of  his  Gospel  unto  us ;  to  wit,  that  not  only  unto  all- 
believers  in  general,  but  unto  each  of  them  in  particular,  he  freely 
giveth  remission  of  sins  and  life  eternal,  upon  the  account  of  thai- 
only  sacrifice  of  Christ,  which  he  accomplished  upon  the  cross." 

The  Church  of  England,  in  her  Twenty-fifth  Article,  thus 
expresses  herself: — 

"  Sacraments  ordained  of  Christ  be  not  only  badges  or  tokens 
of  Christian  men's  profession,  but  rather  they  be  sure  witnesses, 
and  effectual  signs  of  grace,  and  God's  will  towards  us,  by  the 
which  he  doth  work  invisibly  in  us,  and  doth  not  only  quicken, 
but  also  strengthen  and  confirm  our  faith  in  him." 

The  Church  of  Scotland,  in  the  one  hundred  and  sixty-second 
Question  of  her  Larger  Catechism,  asks, 

"  What  is  a  sacrament '?"  and  replies, 

"  A  sacrament  is  a  holy  ordinance,  instituted  by  Christ  in  his 
Church,  to  signify,  seal,  and  exhibit,  unto  those  within  the  cove- 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  361 

nant  of  grace,  the  benefits  of  his  mediation ;  to  strengthen  and 
increase  their  faith,  and  all  other  graces ;  to  oblige  them  to  obe- 
dience ;  to  testify  and  cherish  their  love  and  communion  one  with 
another ;  and  to  distinguish  them  from  those  that  are  without." 

In  all  these  descriptions  of  a  sacrament,  terms  are  employed  of 
just  and  weighty  meaning,  which  will  subsequently  require  notice. 
Generally  it  may,  however,  here  be  observed,  that  they  all  assume 
that  there  is  in  this  ordinance  an  express  institution  of  God ;  that 
there  is  this  essential  difference  between  them  and  every  other 
symbolical  ceremony,  that  they  are  seals  as  well  as  signs,  that  is, 
that  they  afford  pledges  on  the  part  of  God  of  grace  and  salvation  ; 
that  as  a  covenant  has  two  parties,  our  external  acts  in  receiving 
the  sacraments  are  indications  of  certain  states  and  dispositions  of 
our  mind  with  regard  to  God's  covenant,  without  which  none  can 
have  a  personal  participation  in  its  benefits,  and  so  the  sacrament  is 
useless  where  these  are  not  found ;  that  there  are  words  of  insti- 
tution ;  and  a  promise  also  by  which  the  sign  and  the  thing  signified 
are  connected  together. 

The  covenant  of  which  they  are  the  seals,  is  that  called  by  the 
Heidelberg  Catechism,  "  the  promise  of  the  Gospel ;"  the  import  of 
which  is,  that  God  giveth  freely  to  every  one  that  believeth  remis- 
sion of  sins,  with  all  spiritual  blessings,  and  "  life  eternal,  upon  the 
account  of  that  only  sacrifice  of  Christ  which  he  accomplished 
upon  the  cross." 

As  Signs,  they  are  visible  and  symbolical  expositions  of  what 
the  Article  of  the  Church  of  England,  above  quoted,  calls  "  the 
grace  of  God,"  and  his  "  will,"  that  is,  his  "good  will  towards  us ;" 
or,  according  to  the  Church  of  Scotland,  "  significations  of  the 
benefits  of  his  mediation  ;"  that  is,  they  exhibit  to  the  senses,  under 
appropriate  emblems,  the  same  benefits  as  are  exhibited  in  another 
form  in  the  doctrines  and  promises  of  the  word  of  God,  so  that  "  the 
eye  may  affect  and  instruct  the  heart,"  and  that  for  the  strong 
incitement  of  our  faith,  our  desire,  and  our  gratitude.  It  ought 
nevertheless  to  be  remembered  that  they  are  not  signs  merely  of 
the  grace  of  God  to  us,  but  of  our  obligations  to  him  ;  obligations, 
however,  still  flowing  from  the  same  grace. 

They  are  also  Seals.  A  seal  is  a  confirming  sign,  or,  accord- 
ing to  theological  language,  there  is  in  a  sacrament  a  signum  signi- 
ficant, and  a  signum  confirmans  ;  the  former  of  which  is  said,  signi- 
ficare,  to  notify  or  to  declare  ;  the  latter  obsignate,  to  set  one's  seal 
to,  to  witness.  As,  therefore,  the  sacraments,  when  considered  as 
signs,  contain  a  declaration  of  the  same  doctrines  and  promises 
which  the  written  word  of  God  exhibits,  but  addressed  by  a  signi- 

Vol.  III.  39 


362  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

ficant  emblem  to  the  senses ;  so  also  as  seals,  or  pledges,  they 
confirm  the  same  promises  which  are  assured  to  us  by  God's  own 
truth  and  faithfulness  in  his  word,  (which  is  the  main  ground  of  all 
affiance  in  his  mercy,)  and  by  his  indwelling  Spirit  by  which  we 
are  "  sealed,"  and  have  in  our  hearts  "  the  earnest"  of  our  hea- 
venly inheritance.  This  is  done  by  an  external  and  visible  institu- 
tion ;  so  that  God  has  added  these  ordinances  to  the  promises  of 
his  word,  not  only  to  bring  his  merciful  purpose  towards  us  in 
Christ  to  mind,  but  constantly  to  assure  us  that  those  who  believe 
in  him  shall  be  and  are  made  partakers  of  his  grace.  These 
ordinances  are  a  pledge  to  them,  that  Christ  and  his  benefits 
are  theirs,  whilst  they  are  required,  at  the  same  time,  by  faith, 
as  well  as  by  the  visible  sign,  to  signify  their  compliance  with  his 
covenant,  which  may  be  called  "  setting  to  their  seal."  "  The 
sacraments  are  God's  seals,  as  they  are  ordinances  given  by  him 
for  the  confirmation  of  our  faith  that  he  would  be  our  covenant 
God ;  and  they  are  our  seals,  or  we  set  our  seal  thereunto,  when 
we  visibly  profess  that  we  give  up  ourselves  to  him  to  be  his 
people,  and,  in  the  exercise  of  a  true  faith,  look  to  be  partakers 
of  the  benefits  which  Christ  hath  purchased,  according  to  the 
terms  of  the  covenant."  (5) 

The  passage  quoted  from  the  Heidelberg  Catechism  has  a 
clause  which  is  of  great  importance  in  explaining  the  design  of 
the  sacraments.  They  are  "visible  signs  and  seals  ordained  by 
God  for  this  end,  that  He  may  more  fully  declare,  and  seal  by 
them  the  promise  of  his  Gospel  unto  us,  to  wit,  that  not  only  unto 
all  believers  in  general,  but  to  each  of  them  in  particular,  he  freely 
giveth  remission  of  sins  and  life  eternal,  upon  the  account  of  that 
only  sacrifice  of  Christ,  which  he  accomplished  upon  the  cross." 
For  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  the  administration  is  to  particular 
individuals  separately,  both  in  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper, — 
"  Take,  eat,"  "  drink  ye  all  of  this  ;"  so  that  the  institution  of  the 
sign  and  seal  of  the  covenant,  and  the  acceptance  of  this  sign  and 
seal  is  a  solemn  transaction  between  God  and  each  individual. 
From  which  it  follows,  that  to  every  one  to  whom  the  sign  is 
exhibited,  a  seal  and  pledge  of  the  invisible  grace  is  also  given ; 
and  every  individual  who  draws  near  with  a  true  heart  and  full 
assurance  of  faith,  does  in  his  own  person  enter  into  God's  cove- 
nant, and  to  him  in  particular  that  covenant  stands  firm.  He  renews 
it  also  in  every  sacramental  act,  the  repetition  of  which  is  appoint- 
ed ;  and  being  authorized  by  a  Divine  and  standing  institution  thus 

(5)  Dr.  Ridcley. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  363 

to  put  in  his  claim  to  the  full  grace  of  the  covenant,  he  receives 
thereby  continual  assurances  of  the  love  and  faithfulness  of  a  God 
who  changes  not ;  but  exhibits  the  same  signs  and  pledges  of  the 
same  covenant  of  grace,  to  the  constant  acceptance  of  every  indivi- 
dual believer  throughout  all  the  ages  of  his  Church,  which  is  charged 
with  the  ministration  of  these  sacred  symbols  of  his  mercy  to  man- 
kind.  This  is  an  important  and  most  encouraging  circumstance. 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  Institutions  of  the  Church. — Baptism. 

The  obligation  of  baptism  rests  upon  the  example  of  our  Lord, 
who,  by  his  disciples,  baptized  many  that  by  his  discourses  and 
miracles  were  brought  to  profess  faith  in  him  as  the  Messias ; — 
upon  his  solemn  command  to  his  Apostles  after  his  resurrection, 
"Go  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  ;"(6)— and  upon 
the  practice  of  the  Apostles  themselves,  who  thus  showed  that 
they  did  not  understand  baptism,  like  our  Quakers,  in  a  mystical 
sense.  Thus  St.  Peter,  in  his  sermon  upon  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
exhorts,  "  Repent  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name 
of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the 
Holy  Ghost."  (7) 

As  to  this  sacrament,  which  has  occasioned  endless  and  various 
controversies,  three  things  require  examination, — its  nature  ;  its 
subjects  ;  and  its  mode. 

I.  Its  Nature. — The  Romanists,  agreeably  to  their  supersti- 
tious opinion  as  to  the  efficacy  of  sacraments,  consider  baptism 
administered  by  a  Priest  having  a  good  intention,  as  of  itself  apply- 
ing the  merits  of  Christ  to  the  person  baptized.  According  to  them, 
baptism  is  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation,  and  they  therefore 
admit  its  validity  when  administered  to  a  dying  child  by  any  person 
present,  should  there  be  no  Priest  at  hand.  From  this  view  of  its 
efficacy  arises  their  distinction  between  sins  committed  before  and 
after  baptism.  The  hereditary  corruption  of  our  nature,  and  all 
actual  sins  committed  before  baptism,  are  said  to  be  entirely  removed 
by  it ;  so  that  if  the  most  abandoned  person  were  to  receive  it  for 
the  first  time  in  the  article  of  death,  all  his  sins  would  be  washed 
away.    But  all  sins  committed  after  baptism,  and  the  infusion  of 

(6)  Matt,  xxviii,  30.  (7)  Acts  ii,  38. 


364  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

that  grace  which  is  conveyed  by  the  sacrament,  must  be  expiated 
by  penance.  In  this  notion  of  regeneration,  or  the  washing  away 
of  original  sin  by  baptism,  the  Roman  Church  followed  Augustine  ; 
but  as  he  was  a  predestinarian,  he  was  obliged  to  invent  a  distinc- 
tion between  those  who  are  regenerated,  and  those  who  are  pre- 
destinated to  eternal  life  ;  so  that,  according  to  him,  although  all 
the  baptized  are  freed  from  that  corruption  which  is  entailed  upon 
mankind  by  Adam's  lapse,  and  experience  a  renovation  of  mind, 
none  continue  to  walk  in  that  state  but  the  predestinated.  The 
Lutheran  Church  also  places  the  efficacy  of  this  sacrament  in 
regeneration,  by  which  faith  is  actually  conveyed  to  the  soul  of  an 
infant.  The  Church  of  England  in  her  baptismal  services  has  not 
departed  entirely  from  the  terms  used  by  the  Romish  Church  from 
which  she  separated.  She  speaks  of  those  who  are  by  nature 
"  born  in  sin,"  being  made  by  baptism  "  the  children  of  grace," 
which  are,  however,  words  of  equivocal  import ;  and  she  gives 
thanks  to  God  "  that  it  hath  pleased  him  to  regenerate  this  infant 
with  his  Holy  Spirit,"  probably  using  the  term  regeneration  in  the 
same  large  sense  as  several  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  and  not  in  its 
modern  theological  interpretation,  which  is  more  strict.  However 
this  be,  a  controversy  has  long  existed  in  the  English  Church  as  to 
the  real  opinion  of  her  founders  on  this  point ;  one  part  of  the 
Clergy  holding  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  and  the 
absolute  necessity  of  baptism  unto  salvation  ;  the  other  taking 
different  views  not  only  of  the  doctrine  of  Scripture,  but  also 
of  the  import  of  various  expressions  found  in  the  Articles,  Cate- 
chisms, and  Offices  of  the  Church  itself.  The  Quakers  view 
baptism  only  as  spiritual,  and  thus  reject  the  rite  altogether,  as 
one  of  the  "  beggarly  elements"  of  former  dispensations ;  whilst 
the  Socinians  regard  it  as  a  mere  mode  of  professing  the  religion 
of  Christ.  Some  of  them  indeed  consider  it  as  calculated  to 
produce  a  moral  effect  upon  those  who  submit  to  it,  or  who 
witness  its  administration  ;  whilst  others  think  it  so  entirely  a 
ceremony  of  induction  into  the  society  of  Christians  from  Judaism 
and  Paganism,  as  to  be  necessary  only  when  such  conversions  take 
place,  so  that  it  might  be  wholly  laid  aside  in  Christian  nations. 

We  have  called  baptism  a  federal  transaction  ;  an  initiation  into, 
and  acceptance  of,  the  covenant  of  grace,  required  of  us  by  Christ 
as  a  visible  expression  and  act  of  that  faith  in  Him  which  He  has 
made  a  condition  of  that  salvation.  It  is  a  point,  however,  of  so  much 
importance  to  establish  the  covenant  character  of  this  ordinance, 
and  so  much  of  the  controversy  as  to  the  proper  subjects  of  baptism 
depends  upon  it,  that  we  may  consider  it  somewhat  at  large. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  365 

That  the  covenant  with  Abraham,  of  which  circumcision  was 
made  the  sign  and  seal,  (8)  was  the  general  covenant  of  grace,  and 
not  wholly,  or  even  chiefly,  a  political  and  national  covenant,  may 
be  satisfactorily  established. 

The  first  engagement  in  it  was,  that  God  would  "  greatly  bless" 
Abraham ;  which  promise,  although  it  comprehended  temporal 
blessings,  referred,  as  we  learn  from  St.  Paul,  more  fully  to  the 
blessing  of  his  justification  by  the  imputation  of  his  faith  for 
righteousness,  with  all  the  spiritual  advantages  consequent  upon 
the  relation  which  was  thus  established  between  him  and  God,  in 
time  and  eternity.  The  second  promise  in  the  covenant  was, 
that  he  should  be  "  the  Father  of  many  nations,"  which  we  are 
also  taught  by  St.  Paul  to  interpret  more  with  reference  to  his 
spiritual  seed,  the  followers  of  that  faith  whereof  cometh  justifica- 
tion, than  to  his  natural  descendants.  "  That  the  promise  might 
be  sure  to  all  the  seed,  not  only  to  that  which  is  by  the  law,  but 
to  that  also  which  is  by  the  faith  of  Abraham,  who  is  the  father  of 
us  a//," — of  all  believing  Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews.  The  third 
stipulation  in  God's  covenant  with  the  patriarch,  was  the  gift  to 
Abraham  and  to  his  seed  of  "the  land  of  Canaan,"  in  which  the 
temporal  promise  was  manifestly  but  the  type  of  the  higher  pro- 
mise of  a  heavenly  inheritance.  Hence  St.  Paul  says,  "  By  faith 
he  sojourned  in  the  land  of  promise,  dwelling  in  tabernacles  with 
Isaac  and  Jacob,  the  heirs  with  him  of  the  same  promise ;"  but 
this  "  faith"  did  not  respect  the  fulfilment  of  the  temporal  promise  ; 
for  St.  Paul  adds,  "  they  looked  for  a  city  which  had  foundations, 
whose  builder  and  maker  is  God."  (9)  The  next  promise  was,  that 
God  would  always  be  "  a  God  to  Abraham,  and  to  his  seed  after 
him,"  a  promise  which  is  connected  with  the  highest  spiritual  bless- 
ings, such  as  the  remission  of  sins,  and  the  sanctification  of  our 
nature,  as  well  as  with  a  visible  Church  state.  It  is  even  used  to 
express  the  felicitous  state  of  the  Church  in  heaven,  Rev.  xxi,  3. 
The  final  engagement  in  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  was,  that  in 
Abraham's  "  seed,  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  should  be  blessed  ;" 
and  this  blessing,  we  are  expressly  taught  by  St.  Paul,  was  nothing 
less  than  the  justification  of  all  nations,  that  is,  of  all  believers  in  all 
nations,  by  faith  in  Christ : — "  And  the  Scripture,  foreseeing  that 
God  would  justify  the  Heathen  by  faith,  preached  before  the 
Gospel  to  Abraham,  saying,  In  thee  shall  all  nations  be  blessed. 
So  then  they  who  are  of  faith,  are  blessed  with  believing  Abra- 
ham," they  receive  the  same  blessing,  justification,  by  the  same 
means,  faith,  Gal.  iii,  8,  9. 

(8)  Gen.  xvii,  7-14.  (9)  Heb.  xi,  19. 

39* 


366  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

This  covenant  with  Abraham,  therefore,  although  it  respected  a 
natural  seed,  Isaac,  from  whom  a  numerous  progeny  was  to  spring  ; 
and  an  earthly  inheritance  provided  for  this  issue,  the  land  of  Ca- 
naan ;  and  a  special  covenant  relation  with  the  descendants  of 
Isaac,  through  the  line  of  Jacob,  to  whom  Jehovah  was  to  be  "  a 
God,"  visibly  and  specially,  and  they  a  visible  and  "  peculiar 
people ;"  yet  was,  under  all  these  temporal,  earthly,  and  external 
advantages,  but  a  higher  and  spiritual  grace  embodying  itself  under 
these  circumstances,  as  types  of  a  dispensation  of  salvation  and  eternal 
life,  to  all  who  should  follow  the  faith  of  Abraham,  whose  justifica- 
tion before  God  was  the  pattern  of  the  justification  of  every  man, 
whether  Jew  or  Gentile,  in  all  ages. 

Now,  of  this  covenant,  in  its  spiritual  as  well  as  in  its  temporal 
provisions,  circumcision  was  most  certainly  the  sacrament,  that  is, 
the  "  sign"  and  the  "  seal ;"  for  St.  Paul  thus  explains  the  case  : 
"And  he  received  the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal  of  the  right- 
eousness of  the  faith  which  he  had  yet  being  uncircumcised."  And 
as  this  rite  was  enjoined  upon  Abraham's  posterity,  so  that  every 
"  uncircumcised  man  child  whose  flesh  of  his  foreskin  was  not  cir- 
cumcised on  the  eighth  clay,"  was  to  be  "  cut  off  from  his  people," 
by  the  special  judgment  of  God,  and  that  because  "  he  had  broken 
God's  covenant,'" (I)  it  therefore  follows  that  this  rite  was  a  constant 
publication  of  God's  covenant  of  grace  among  the  descendants  of 
Abraham,  and  its  repetition  a  continual  confirmation  of  that  cove- 
nant, on  the  part  of  God,  to  all  practising  it  in  that  faith  of  which 
it  was  the  ostensible  expression. 

As  the  covenant  of  grace  made  with  Abraham  was  bound  up 
with  temporal  promises  and  privileges,  so  circumcision  was  a  sign 
and  seal  of  the  covenant  in  both  its  parts, — its  spiritual  and  its 
temporal,  its  superior  and  inferior,  provisions.  The  spiritual  pro- 
mises of  the  covenant  continued  unrestricted  to  all  the  descendants 
of  Abraham,  whether  by  Isaac  or  by  Ishmael ;  and  still  lower 
down,  to  the  descendants  of  Esau  as  well  as  to  those  of  Jacob. 
Circumcision  was  practised  among  them  all  by  virtue  of  its  Divine 
institution  at  first ;  and  was  extended  to  their  foreign  servants,  and 
to  proselytes,  as  well  as  to  their  children ;  and  wherever  the  sign 
of  the  covenant  of  grace  was  by  Divine  appointment,  there  it  was 
as  a  seal  of  that  covenant,  to  all  who  believingly  used  it ;  for  we 
read  of  no  restriction  of  its  spiritual  blessings,  that  is,  its  saving 
engagements,  to  one  line  of  descent  from  Abraham  only.  But 
over  the  temporal  branch  of  the  covenant,  and  the  external  religious 

(1)  Gen.  xvii,  14. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  367 

privileges  arising  out  of  it,  God  exercised  a  rightful  sovereignty, 
and  expressly  restricted  them  first  to  the  line  of  Isaac,  and  then  to 
that  of  Jacob,  with  whose  descendants  he  entered  into  special 
covenant  by  the  ministry  of  Moses.  The  temporal  blessings  and 
external  privileges  comprised  under  general  expressions  in  the 
covenant  with  Abraham,  were  explained  and  enlarged  under  that 
of  Moses,  whilst  the  spiritual  blessings  remained  unrestricted  as 
before.  This  was  probably  the  reason  why  circumcision  was 
re-enacted  under  the  law  of  Moses.  It  was  a  confirmation  of  the 
temporal  blessings  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  now,  by  a  covenant 
of  peculiarity,  made  over  to  them,  whilst  it  was  still  recognised 
as  a  consuetudinary  rite  which  had  descended  to  them  from  their 
fathers,  and  as  the  sign  and  seal  of  the  covenant  of  grace,  made 
with  Abraham  and  with  all  his  descendants  without  exception. 
This  double  reference  of  circumcision,  both  to  the  authority  of 
Moses  and  to  that  of  the  patriarchs,  is  found  in  the  words  of  our 
Lord,  John  vii,  22  ;  "  Moses  therefore  gave  unto  you  circumcision, 
not  because  it  is  of  Moses,  but  of  the  fathers ;"  or,  as  it  is  better 
translated  by  Campbell,  "  Moses  instituted  circumcision  amongst 
you,  (not  that  it  is  from  Moses,  but  from  the  patriarchs,)  and  ye 
circumcise  on  the  Sabbath.  If  on  the  Sabbath  a  child  receive  cir- 
cumcision, that  the  law  of  Moses  may  not  be  violated,"  &c. 

From  these  observations,  the  controversy  in  the  Apostolic 
Churches  respecting  circumcision  will  derive  much  elucidation. 

The  covenant  with  Abraham  prescribed  circumcision  as  an  act 
of  faith  in  its  promises,  and  a  pledge  [to  perform  its  conditions] 
[on  the  part  of  his  descendants.]  But  the  object  on  which  this 
faith  rested,  was  "  the  Seed  of  Abraham,"  in  whom  the  nations  of 
the  earth  were  to  be  blessed  :  which  Seed,  says  St.  Paul,  "  is 
Christ ;" — Christ  as  promised,  not  yet  come.  When  the  Christ 
had  come,  so  as  fully  to  enter  upon  his  redeeming  offices,  he  could 
no  longer  be  the  object  of  faith,  as  still  to  come  ;  and  this  leading 
promise  of  the  covenant  being  accomplished,  the  sign  and  seal  of 
it  vanished  away.  Nor  could  circumcision  be  continued  in  this 
view,  by  any,  without  an  implied  denial  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ, 
the  expected  Seed  of  Abraham.  Circumcision  also  as  an  institu- 
tion of  Moses,  who  continued  it  as  the  sign  and  seal  of  the  Abra- 
hamic covenant  both  in  its  spiritual  and  temporal  provisions,  but 
with  respect  to  the  latter  made  it  also  the  sign  and  seal  of  the 
restriction  of  its  temporal  blessings  and  peculiar  religious  privi- 
leges to  the  descendants  of  Israel,  was  terminated  by  the  entrance 
of  our  Lord  upon  his  office  of  Mediator,  in  which  office  all  nations 
were  to  be  blessed  in  him.     The  Mosaic  edition  of  the  covenant 


368  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

not  only  guaranteed  the  land  of  Canaan,  but  the  peculiarity  of  the 
Israelites,  as  the  people  and  visible  Church  of  God  to  the  exclusion 
of  others,  except  by  proselytism.  But  when  our  Lord  commanded 
the  Gospel  to  be  preached  to  "  all  nations,"  and  opened  the  gates 
of  the  "  common  salvation"  to  all,  whether  Gentiles  or  Jews,  cir- 
cumcision, as  the  sign  of  a  covenant  of  peculiarity  and  religious 
distinction,  was  done  away  also.  It  had  not  only  no  reason  remain- 
ing, but  the  continuance  of  the  rite  involved  the  recognition  of 
exclusive  privileges  which  had  been  terminated  by  Christ. 

This  will  explain  the  views  of  the  Apostle  Paul  on  this  great 
question.    He  declares  that  in  Christ  there  is  neither  circumcision 
nor  uncircumcision  ;  that  neither  circumcision  availeth  any  thing, 
nor  uncircumcision,  but  "  faith  that  worketh  by  love  ;"  faith  in  the 
Seed  of  Abraham  already  come  and  already  engaged  in  his  media- 
torial and  redeeming  work  ;  faith,  by  virtue  of  which  the  Gentiles 
came  into  the  Church  of  Christ  on  the  same  terms  as  the  Jews  them- 
selves, and  were  justified  and  saved.  The  doctrine  of  the  non-neces- 
sity of  circumcision,  he  applies  to  the  Jews  as  well  as  to  the  Gentiles, 
although  he  specially  resists  the  attempts  of  the  Judaizers  to 
impose  this  rite  upon  the  Gentile  converts ;  in  which  he  was 
supported  by  the  decision  of  the  Holy  Spirit  when  the  appeal 
upon  this  question  was  made  to  "  the  Apostles  and  Elders  at 
Jerusalem,"  from  the  Church  at  Antioch.     At  the  same  time  it  is 
clear  that  he  takes  two  different  views  of  the  practice  of  circum- 
cision, as  it  was  continued  among  many  of  the  first  Christians. 
The  first  is  that  strong  one  which  is  expressed  in  Gal.  v,  2-4, 
"  Behold  I  Paul  say  unto  you,  that  if  ye  be  circumcised,  Christ 
shall  profit  you  nothing ;  for  I  testify  again  to  every  man  that  is 
circumcised,  that  he  is  a  debtor  to  do  the  whole  law.     Christ  is 
become  of  no  effect  unto  you,  whosoever  of  you  are  justified  by  the 
law,  ye  are  fallen  from  grace."     The  second  is  that  milder  view 
which  he  himself  must  have  had  when  he  circumcised  Timothy  to 
render  him  more  acceptable  to  the  Jews ;  and  which  also  appears 
to  have  led  him  to  abstain  from  all  allusion  to  this  practice  when 
writing  his  Epistle  to  the  believing  Hebrews,  although  many,  per- 
haps most  of  them,  continued  to  circumcise  their  children,  as  did 
the  Jewish  Christians  for  a  long  time  afterwards.     These  different 
views  of  circumcision,  held  by  the  same  person,  may  be  explained 
by  considering  the  different  principles  on  which  circumcision  might 
be  practised  after  it  had  become  an  obsolete  ordinance. 

1.  It  might  be  taken  in  the  simple  view  of  its  first  institution,  as 
the  sign  and  seal  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant ;  and  then  it  was  to 
be  condemned  as  involving  a  denial  that  Abraham's  Seed,  the 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  369 

Christ,  had  already  come,  since,  upon  his  coming,  every  old  cove- 
nant gave  place  to  the  new  covenant  introduced  by  him. 

2.  It  might  be  practised  and  enjoined  as  the  sign  and  seal  of 
the  Mosaic  covenant,  which  was  still  the  Abrahamic  covenant 
with  its  spiritual  blessings,  but  with  restriction  of  its  temporal 
promises  and  special  ecclesiastical  privileges  to  the  line  of  Jacob, 
with  a  law  of  observances  which  was  obligatory  upon  all  entering 
that  covenant  by  circumcision.  In  that  case  it  involved,  in  like 
manner,  the  notion  of  the  continuance  of  an  old  covenant,  after  the 
establishment  of  the  new  ;  for  thus  St.  Paul  states  the  case  in  Gal. 
iii,  19,  "Wherefore  then  serveth  the  law1?  It  was  added  because 
of  transgressions  until  the  seed  should  come."  After  that  there- 
fore it  had  no  effect : — it  had  waxed  old,  and  had  vanished  away. 

3.  Again :  Circumcision  might  imply  an  obligation  to  observe 
all  the  ceremonial  usages  and  the  moral  precepts  of  the  Mosaic 
law,  along  with  a  general  belief  in  the  mission  of  Christ,  as  neces- 
sary to  justification  before  God.  This  appears  to  have  been  the 
view  of  those  among  the  Galatian  Christians  who  submitted  to  cir- 
cumcision, and  of  the  Jewish  teachers  who  enjoined  it  upon  them  ; 
for  St.  Paul  in  that  epistle  constantly  joins  circumcision  with  legal 
observances,  and  as  involving  an  obligation  to  do  "  the  whole  law," 
in  order  to  justification. — "  I  testify  again  to  every  man  that  is  cir- 
cumcised that  he  is  a  debtor  to  do  the  whole  law  ;  whosoever 
of  you  are  justified  by  the  law,  ye  are  fallen  from  grace."  "  Know- 
ing that  a  man  is  not  justified  by  the  loorks  of  the  law,  but  by  the 
faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  Gal.  ii,  1 6.  To  all  persons  there- 
fore practising  circumcision  in  this  view  it  was  obvious,  that  "Christ 
was  become  of  none  effect,"  the  very  principle  of  justification  by 
faith  alone  in  him  was  renounced,  even  whilst  his  Divine  mission 
was  still  admitted. 

4.  But  there  are  two  grounds  on  which  circumcision  may  be 
conceived  to  have  been  innocently,  though  not  wisely,  practised 
among  the  Christian  Jews.  The  first  was  that  of  preserving  an 
ancient  national  distinction  on  which  they  valued  themselves ;  and 
were  a  converted  Jew  in  the  present  day  disposed  to  perform  that 
rite  upon  his  children  for  this  purpose  only,  renouncing  in  the  act 
all  consideration  of  it  as  a  sign  and  seal  of  the  old  covenants,  or  as 
obliging  to  ceremonial  acts  in  order  to  justification,  no  one  would 
censure  him  with  severity.  It  appears  clear  that  it  was  under  some 
such  view  that  St.  Paul  circumcised  Timothy,  whose  mother  was  a 
Jewess  ;  he  did  it  because  of  "  the  Jews  which  were  in  those 
quarters,"  that  is,  because  of  their  national  prejudices,  "  for  they 
knew  that  his  father  was  a  Greek."     The  second  was  a  lingering 

I 


370  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

notion,  that,  even  in  the  Christian  Church,  the  Jews  who  believed 
would  still  retain  some  degree  of  eminence,  some  superior  relation 
to  God  ;  a  notion  which,  however  unfounded,  was  not  one  which 
demanded  direct  rebuke,  when  it  did  not  proudly  refuse  spiritual 
communion  with  the  converted  Gentiles,  but  was  held  by  men  who 
"  rejoiced  that  God  had  granted  to  the  Gentiles  repentance  unto 
life."  These  considerations  may  account  for  the  silence  of  St.  Paul 
on  the  subject  of  circumcision  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Some 
of  them  continued  to  practise  that  rite,  but  they  were  probably 
believers  of  the  class  just  mentioned  ;  for  had  he  thought  that  the 
rite  was  continued  among  them  on  any  principle  which  affected  the 
fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity,  he  would  no  doubt  have 
been  equally  prompt  and  fearless  in  pointing  out  that  apostasy  from 
Christ  which  was  implied  in  it,  as  when  he  wrote  to  the  Galatians. 
Not  only  might  circumcision  be  practised  with  views  so  opposite 
that  one  might  be  wholly  innocent,  although  an  infirmity  of  preju- 
dice ;  the  other  such  as  would  involve  a  rejection  of  the  doctrine 
of  justification  by  faith  in  Christ ;  but  some  other  Jewish  observ- 
ances also  stood  in  the  same  circumstances.  St.  Paul,  in  his 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  a  part  of  his  writings  from  which  we 
obtain  the  most  information  on  these  questions,  grounds  his 
"  doubts"  whether  the  members  of  that  Church  were  not  seek- 
ing to  be  "  justified  by  the  law,"  upon  their  observing  "  days, 
and  months,  and  times,  and  years."  Had  he  done  more  than 
"  doubt,"  he  would  have  expressed  himself  more  positively.  He 
saw  their  danger  on  this  point ;  he  saw  that  they  were  taking  steps 
to  this  fatal  result,  by  such  an  observance  of  these  "  days,"  &c,  as 
had  a  strong  leaning  and  dangerous  approach  to  that  dependence 
upon  them  for  justification,  which  would  destroy  their  faith  in 
Christ's  solely  sufficient  sacrifice  ;  but  his  very  doubting,  not  of 
the  fact  of  their  being  addicted  to  these  observances,  but  of  the 
animus  with  which  they  regarded  them,  supposes  it  possible,  how- 
ever dangerous  this  Jewish  conformity  might  be,  that  they  might 
be  observed  for  reasons  which  would  still  consist  with  their  entire 
reliance  upon  the  merits  of  Christ  for  salvation.  Even  he  himself, 
strongly  as  he  resisted  the  imposition  of  this  conformity  to  Jewish 
customs  upon  the  converts  to  Christianity  as  a  matter  of  necessity, 
yet  in  practice  must  have  conformed  to  many  of  them,  when  no 
sacrifice  of  principle  was  understood ;  for,  in  order  to  gain  the 
Jews,  he  became  "  as  a  Jew." 

From  these  observations,  which  have  been  somewhat  digressive, 
we  return  to  observe  that  not  only  was  the  Abrahamic  covenant, 
of  which  circumcision  was  the  sign  and  seal,  a  covenant  of  grace, 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  371 

but  that  when  this  covenant  in  its  ancient  form  was  done  away  in 
Christ,  then  the  old  sign  and  seal  peculiar  to  that  form  was  by  con- 
sequence abolished.  If  then  baptism  be  not  the  initiatory  sign  and 
seal  of  the  same  covenant  in  its  new  and  perfect  form,  as  circum- 
cision was  of  the  old,  this  new  covenant  has  no  such  initiatory  rite 
or  sacrament  at  all ;  since  the  Lord's  Supper  is  not  initiatory,  but, 
like  the  sacrifices  of  old,  is  of  regular  and  habitual  observance. 
Several  passages  of  Scripture,  and  the  very  nature  of  the  ordinance 
of  baptism,  will,  however,  show  that  baptism  is  to  the  new  cove- 
nant what  circumcision  was  to  the  old,  and  took  its  place  by  the 
appointment  of  Christ. 

This  may  be  argued  from  our  Lord's  commission  to  his  Apos- 
tles, "  Go  ye  therefore  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  teach- 
ing them  to  observe  all  things,  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you," 
Matt,  xxviii,  19,  20.  "Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the 
Gospel  to  every  creature ;  he  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall 
be  saved,"  Mark  xvi,  15,  16. 

To  understand  the  force  of  these  words  of  our  Lord,  it  must  be 
observed,  that  the  gate  of  "  the  common  salvation"  was  only  now 
for  the  first  time  going  to  be  opened  to  the  Gentile  nations.  He 
himself  had  declared  that  in  his  personal  ministry  he  was  not  sent 
but  to  "  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel ;"  and  he  had  restricted 
his  disciples  in  like  manner,  not  only  from  ministering  to  the  Gen- 
tiles, but  from  entering  any  city  of  the  Samaritans.  By  what  means 
therefore  were  "  all  nations"  now  to  be  brought  into  the  Church 
of  God,  which  from  henceforth  was  most  truly  to  be  catholic  or 
universal  1  Plainly,  by  baptizing  them  that  believed  the  "good 
news,"  and  accepted  the  terms  of  the  new  covenant.  This  is 
apparent  from  the  very  words ;  and  thus  was  baptism  expressly 
made  the  initiatory  rite,  by  which  believers  of  "  all  nations"  were 
to  be  introduced  into  the  Church  and  covenant  of  grace  ;  an  office 
in  which  it  manifestly  took  the  place  of  circumcision,  which  here- 
tofore, even  from  the  time  of  Abraham,  had  been  the  only  initiatory 
rite  into  the  same  covenant.  Moses  re-enacted  circumcision  ;  our 
Lord  not  only  does  not  re-enact  it,  but,  on  the  contrary,  he  appoints 
another  mode  of  entrance  into  the  covenant  in  its  new  and  per- 
fected form,  and  that  so  expressly  as  to  amount  to  a  formal  abro- 
gation of  the  ancient  sign,  and  the  putting  of  baptism  in  its  place. 
The  same  argument  may  be  maintained  from  the  words  of  our 
Lord  to  Nicodemus,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the 
Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God."  By  the  king- 
dom of  God  our  Lord,  no  doubt,  in  the  highest  sense,  means  the 


372  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

future  state  of  felicity ;  but  he  uses  this  phrase  to  express  the  state 
of  his  Church  on  earth,  which  is  the  gate  to  that  celestial  kingdom  ; 
and  generally  indeed  speaks  of  his  Church  on  earth  under  this  mode 
of  expression,  rather  than  of  the  heavenly  state.  If  then  he  declares 
that  no  one  can  "  enter"  into  that  Church  but  by  being  "  born  of 
water  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  which  heavenly  gift  followed  upon 
baptism  when  received  in  true  faith,  he  clearly  makes  baptism  the 
mode  of  initiation  into  his  Church  in  this  passage  as  in  the  last 
quoted  ;  and  in  both  he  assigns  to  it  the  same  office  as  circum- 
cision in  the  Church  of  the  Old  Testament,  whether  in  its  Patri- 
archal or  Mosaic  form. 

A  further  proof  that  baptism  has  precisely  the  same  federal  and 
initiatory  character  as  circumcision,  and  that  it  was  instituted  for 
the  same  ends,  and  in  its  place,  is  found  in  Colossians  ii,  10-12, 
"And  ye  are  complete  in  him,  which  is  the  head  of  all  principality 
and  power ;  in  whom  also  ye  are  circumcised  with  the  circum- 
cision made  without  hands,  in  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of 
the  flesh,  by  the  circumcision  of  Christ,  buried  with  him  in  baptism" 
&c.  Here  baptism  is  also  made  the  initiatory  rite  of  the  new  dis- 
pensation, that  by  which  the  Colossians  were  joined  to  Christ  in 
whom  they  are  said  to  be  "  complete ;"  and  so  certain  is  it  that  bap- 
tism has  the  same  office  and  import  now  as  circumcision  formerly, — 
with  this  difference  only,  that  the  object  of  faith  was  then  future, 
and  now  it  is  Christ  as  come, — that  the  Apostle  expressly  calls  bap- 
tism "  the  circumcision  of  Christ,"  the  circumcision  instituted  by 
him,  which  phrase  he  puts  out  of  the  reach  of  frivolous  criticism, 
by  adding  exegetically, — "buried  with  Him  in  baptism"  For  unless 
the  Apostle  here  calls  baptism  "  the  circumcision  of  Christ,"  he 
asserts  that  we  "  put  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh,"  that  is, 
become  new  creatures  by  virtue  of  our  Lord's  own  personal  cir- 
cumcision ;  but  if  this  be  absurd,  then  the  only  reason  for  which 
he  can  call  baptism  "  the  circumcision  of  Christ,"  or  Christian  cir- 
cumcision, is,  that  it  has  taken  the  place  of  the  Abrahamic  circum- 
cision, and  fulfils  the  same  office  of  introducing  believing  men  into 
God's  covenant,  and  entitling  them  to  the  enjoyment  of  spiritual 
blessings. 

But  let  us  also  quote  Gal.  iii,  27-29,  "For  as  many  of  you  as 
have  been  baptized  into  Christ,  have  put  on  Christ ;  there  is 
neither  Jew  nor  Gentile,  there  is  neither  bond  nor  free,  there  is 
neither  male  nor  female,  for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus  ;  and  if 
ye  are  Christ's,"  by  thus  being  "  baptized,"  and  by  "putting  on" 
Christ,  "  then  are  ye  Abraham's  seed,  and  heirs  according  to  the 
promise." 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  373 

The  argument  here  is  also  decisive.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  it 
was  by  circumcision  believingly  submitted  to,  that  "  strangers"  or 
Heathens,  as  well  as  Jews,  became  the  spiritual  "  seed  of  Abra- 
ham," and  "  heirs"  of  the  same  spiritual  and  heavenly  "  promises.''' 
But  the  same  office  in  this  passage  is  ascribed  to  baptism  also 
believingly  submitted  to ;  and  the  conclusion  is  therefore  inevitable. 
The  same  covenant  character  of  each  rite  is  here  also  strongly 
marked,  as  well  as  that  the  covenant  is  the  same,  although  under 
a  different  mode  of  administration.  In  no  other  way  could  circum- 
cision avail  any  thing  under  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  than  as  it 
was  that  visible  act  by  which  God's  covenant  to  justify  men  by 
faith  in  the  promised  Seed  was  accepted  by  them.  It  was  there- 
fore a  part  of  a  federal  transaction ;  that  outward  act  which  he 
who  offered  a  covenant  engagement  so  gracious  required  as  a 
solemn  declaration  of  the  acceptance  of  the  covenanted  grace, 
upon  the  covenanted  conditions.  It  was  thus  that  the  Abrahamic 
covenant  was  offered  to  the  acceptance  of  all  who  heard  it,  and 
thus  that  they  were  to  declare  their  acceptance  of  it.  In  the  same 
manner  there  is  a  standing  offer  of  the  same  covenant  of  mercy 
wherever  the  Gospel  is  preached.  The  "good  news"  which  it 
contains  is  that  of  a  promise,  an  engagement,  a  covenant  on  the 
part  of  God  to  remit  sin,  and  to  save  all  that  believe  in  Christ.  To 
the  covenant  in  this  new  form  he  also  requires  a  visible  and  formal 
act  of  acceptance,  which  act  when  expressive  of  the  required  iaitli 
makes  us  parties  to  the  covenant,  and  entitles  us  through  the  faith- 
fulness of  God  to  its  benefits.  "  He  that  believelh  and  is  baptized 
shall  be  saved  ;"  or,  as  in  the  passage  before  us,  "  As  many  of  you 
as  have  been  baptized  into  Christ,  have  put  on  Christ ;  and  if  ye 
be  Christ's,  then  are  ye  Abraham's  seed,  and  heirs  according  to 
the  promise." 

We  have  the  same  view  of  baptism  as  an  act  of  covenant  accept- 
ance, and  as  it  relates  to  God's  gracious  engagement  to  justify  the 
ungodly  by  faith  in  his  Son,  in  the  often  quoted  passage  in  1  Peter 
iii,  20,  "Which  sometime  were  disobedient,  when  once  the  long 
suffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was 
preparing,  wherein  few,  that  is,  eight  souls  were  saved  by  water. 
The  like  figure  whereunto  even  baptism  doth  also  now  save  us, 
(not  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good 
conscience  towards  God,)  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ." 

When  St.  Peter  calls  baptism  the  "  figure,"  avnruirov,  the  anti- 
type of  the  transaction  by  which  Noah  and  his  family  were  saved 
from  perishing  with  the  ungodly  and  unbelieving  world,  he  had 
doubtless  in  mind  the  faith  of  Noah,  and  that  under  the  same  view 

Vol.  III.  40 


374  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

as  the  Apostle  Paul,  in  Heb.  xi,  "  By  faith  Noah,  being  warned 
of  God  of  things  not  seen  as  yet,  moved  with  fear,  prepared  an  ark 
to  the  saving  of  his  house ;  by  the  which"  act  of  faith  "  he  con- 
demned the  world,  and  became  heir  of  the  righteousness  which  is  by 
faith ;"  an  expression  of  the  same  import  as  if  he  had  said,  "  by 
which  act  of  faith  he  was  justified  before  God."  It  has  been 
already  explained  in  another  place  (2)  in  what  way  Noah's  pre- 
paring of  the  ark,  and  his  faith  in  the  Divine  promise  of  preserva- 
tion, were  indicative  of  his  having  that  direct  faith  in  the  Christ  to 
come,  of  which  the  Apostle  Paul  discourses  in  the  eleventh  of  the 
Hebrews,  as  that  which  characterized  "  all  the  Elders,"  and  by 
which  they  obtained  their  "  good  report"  in  the  Church.  His  pre- 
servation and  that  of  his  family  was  so  involved  in  the  fulfilment  of 
the  more  ancient  promise  respecting  the  Seed  of  the  woman,  and 
the  deliverance  of  man  from  the  power  of  Satan,  that  we  are  war- 
ranted to  conclude  that  his  faith  in  the  promise  respecting  his  own 
deliverance  from  the  deluge,  was  supported  by  his  faith  in  that 
greater  promise,  which  must  have  fallen  to  the  ground  had  the 
whole  race  perished  without  exception.  His  building  of  the  ark, 
and  entering  into  it  with  his  family,  are  therefore  considered,  by 
St.  Paul,  as  the  visible  expression  of  his  faith  in  the  ancient  pro- 
mises of  God  respecting  Messiah ;  and  for  this  reason  baptism  is 
called  by  St.  Peter,  without  any  allegory  at  all,  but  in  the  sobriety 
of  fact  "  the  anti-type"  of  this  transaction  ;  the  one  exactly  answer- 
ing to  the  other,  as  an  external  expression  of  faith  in  the  same 
objects  and  the  same  promises. 

But  the  Apostle  does  not  rest  in  this  general  representation.  He 
proceeds  to  express,  in  a  particular  and  most  forcible  manner,  the 
nature  of  Christian  baptism, — "  not  the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of 
the  flesh ;  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  towards  God,  by 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ."  Now,  whether  we  take  the 
word  exipurruxa.,  rendered  in  our  translation  "  answer,"  for  a  demand 
or  requirement ;  or  for  the  answer  to  a  question  or  questions  ;  or  in 
the  sense  of  stipulation ;  the  general  import  of  the  passage  is  nearly 
the  same.  If  the  first,  then  the  meaning  of  the  Apostle  is,  that 
baptism  is  not  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  not  a  mere 
external  ceremony  ;  but  a  rite  which  demands  or  requires  some- 
thing of  us,  in  order  to  the  attainment  of  a  "good  conscience." 
What  that  is,  we  learn  from  the  words  of  our  Lord ;  it  is  faith  in 
Christ ;  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved  ;"  which 
faith  is  the  reliance  of  a  penitent  upon  the  atonement  of  the  Saviour, 

(2)  Vol.  ii,  Chap.  22. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  375 

who  thus  submits  with  all  gratitude  and  truth  to  the  terms  of  the 
evangelical  covenant.  If  we  take  the  second  sense,  we  must  lay 
aside  the  notion  of  some  lexicographers  and  commentators,  who 
think  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  the  ancient  practice  of  demanding 
of  the  candidates  for  baptism,  whether  they  renounced  their  sins, 
and  the  service  of  Satan,  with  other  questions  of  the  same  import ; 
for,  ancient  as  these  questions  may  be,  they  are  probably  not  so 
ancient  as  the  time  of  the  Apostle.  We  know  however,  from  the 
instance  of  Philip  and  the  Eunuch,  that  there  was  an  explicit  require- 
ment of  faith,  and  as  explicit  an  answer  or  confession :  "And  Philip 
said,  If  thou  believest  with  all  thy  heart,  thou  mayest ;  and  he  an- 
swered, I  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God."  Every  adminis- 
tration of  baptism  indeed  implied  this  demand  ;  and  baptism,  if  we 
understand  St.  Peter  to  refer  to  this  circumstance,  was  such  an 
"  answer"  to  the  interrogations  of  the  administrator,  as  expressed 
a  true  and  evangelical  faith.  If  we  take  the  third  rendering  of 
"  stipulation,"  which  has  less  to  support  it  critically  than  either  of 
the  others,  still  as  the  profession  of  faith  was  a  condition  of  baptism, 
that  profession  had  the  full  force  of  a  formal  stipulation,  since  all 
true  faith  in  Christ  requires  an  entire  subjection  to  him  as  Lord,  as 
well  as  Saviour. 

Upon  this  passage,  however,  a  somewhat  clearer  light  may  be 
thrown,  by  understanding  the  word  s-n-spurri^a  in  the  sense  of  that 
which  asks,  requires,  seeks,  something  beyond  itself.  The  verb 
from  which  it  is  derived  signifies  to  ask,  or  require  ;  but  etspurrj^a 
occurs  no  where  else  in  the  New  Testament ;  and  but  once  in  the 
version  of  the  Seventy,  Dan.  iv,  17,  where,  however,  it  is  used  so 
as  to  be  fully  illustrative  of  the  meaning  of  St.  Peter.  Nebuchad- 
nezzar was  to  be  humbled  by  being  driven  from  men  to  associate 
with  the  beasts  of  the  field ;  and  the  vision  in  which  this  was  repre- 
sented, concludes,  "  This  matter  is  by  the  decree  of  the  watchers, 
and  the  demand,  to  s^wn^a,  by  the  word  of  the  holy  ones,  to  the 
intent  that  the  living  may  know,  iva  yvwtfiv  01  %uvrsg,  that  the  Most 
High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men."  The  Chaldaic  word,  like 
the  Greek,  is  from  a  verb  which  signifies  to  ask,  to  require,  and 
may  be  equally  expressed  by  the.  word  petitio,  which  is  the  render- 
ing of  the  Vulgate,  or  by  postulatum.  There  was  an  end,  an  " intent," 
for  which  the  humbling  of  the  Babylonian  king  was  required  "  by 
the  word  of  the  holy  ones,"  that,  by  the  signal  punishment  of  the 
greatest  earthly  monarch,  "  the  living  might  know  that  the  Most 
High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men."  In  like  manner  baptism  has 
an  end,  an  "  intent,"  "  not  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the  flesh," 
but  obtaining  "  a  good  conscience  towards  God ;"  and  it  requires, 


376  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

claims,  this  good  conscience,  through  that  faith  in  Christ  whereof 
cometh  remission  of  sins,  the  cleansing  of  the  "  conscience  from 
dead  works,"  and  those  supplies  of  supernatural  aid  by  which,  in 
future,  men  may  "  live  in  all  good  conscience  before  God."  It  is 
thus  that  we  see  how  St.  Peter  preserves  the  correspondence  be- 
tween the  act  of  Noah  in  preparing  the  ark  as  an  act  of  faith  by 
which  he  was  justified,  and  the  act  of  submitting  to  Christian  bap- 
tism, which  is  also  obviously  an  act  of  faith,  in  order  to  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  or  the  obtaining  a  good  conscience  before  God.  This 
is  further  strengthened  by  his  immediately  adding,  "  by  the  resur- 
rection of  Jesus  Christ :"  A  clause  which  our  translators,  by  the 
use  of  a  parenthesis,  connect  with  "baptism  doth  also  now  save 
us;"  so  that  their  meaning  is,  we  are  saved  by  baptism  through  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ ;  and  as  he  "rose  again  for  our  justifi- 
cation," this  sufficiently  shows  the  true  sense  of  the  Apostle,  who, 
by  our  being  "  saved,"  clearly  means  our  being  justified  by  faith. 

The  text  however  needs  no  parenthesis,  and  the  true  sense  may 
be  thus  expressed :  "  The  antitype  to  which  water  of  the  flood, 
baptism,  doth  now  save  us ;  not  the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of 
the  flesh,  but  that  which  intently  seeks  a  good  conscience  towards 
God,  through  faith  in  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ."  But  how- 
ever a  particular  word  may  be  disposed  of,  the  whole  passage  can 
only  be  consistently  taken  to  teach  us,  that  baptism  is  the  outward 
sign  of  our  entrance  into  God's  covenant  of  mercy  ;  and  that  when 
it  is  an  act  of  true  faith,  it  becomes  an  instrument  of  salvation, 
like  that  act  of  faith  in  Noah,  by  which,  when  moved  with  fear, 
he  "  prepared  an  ark  to  the  saving  of  his  house,"  and  survived  the 
destruction  of  an  unbelieving  world. 

From  what  has  been  said  it  will  then  follow,  that  the  Abrahamic 
covenant  and  the  Christian  covenant  is  the  same  gracious  engage- 
ment on  the  part  of  God  to  show  mercy  to  man,  and  to  bestow 
upon  him  eternal  life,  through  faith  in  Christ  as  the  true  sacrifice 
for  sin,  differing  only  in  circumstances ;  and  that  as  the  sign  and 
seal  of  this  covenant  under  the  Old  dispensation  was  circumcision, 
under  the  New  it  is  baptism,  which  has  the  same  federal  character, 
performs  the  same  initiatory  office,  and  is  instituted  by  the  same 
authority.  For  none  could  have  authority  to  lay  aside  the  appointed 
seal,  but  the  Being  who  first  instituted  it,  who  changed  the  form  of 
the  covenant  itself,  and  who  has  in  fact  abrogated  the  old  seal  by 
the  appointment  of  another,  even  baptism,  which  is  made  obliga- 
tory upon  "  all  nations  to  whom  the  Gospel  is  preached,  and  is"  to 
continue  to  "the  end  of  the  world." 

This  argument  is  sufficiently  extended  to  show  that  the  A.nti- 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  377 

paedobaptist  writers  have  in  vain  endeavoured  to  prove  that  bap- 
tism has  not  been  appointed  in  the  room  of  circumcision  ;  a  point 
on  which,  indeed,  they  were  bound  to  employ  all  their  strength ; 
for,  the  substitution  of  baptism  for  circumcision  being  established, 
one  of  their  main  objections  to  infant  baptism,  as  we  shall  just  now 
show,  is  rendered  wholly  nugatory. 

But  it  is  not  enough,  in  stating  the  nature  of  the  ordinance  of 
Christian  baptism,  to  consider  it  generally  as  an  act  by  which  man 
enters  into  God's  covenant  of  grace.  Under  this  general  view 
several  particulars  are  contained,  which  it  is  of  great  importance 
rightly  to  understand.  Baptism,  both  as  a  sign  and  seal,  presents 
an  entire  correspondence  with  the  ancient  rite  of  circumcision. 
Let  it  then  be  considered, 

1.  As  a  sign.  Under  this  view,  circumcision  indicated,  by  a 
visible  and  continued  rite,  the  placability  of  God  towards  his  sinful 
creatures  ;  and  held  out  the  promise  of  justification,  by  faith  alone, 
to  every  truly  penitent  offender.  It  went  further,  and  was  the 
sign  of  sanctification,  or  the  taking  away  the  pollution  of  sin,  "  the 
superfluity  of  naughtiness,"  as  well  as  the  pardon  of  actual  offences, 
and  thus  was  the  visible  emblem  of  a  regenerate  mind,  and  a 
renewed  life.  This  will  appear  from  the  following  passages,  "  For 
he  is  not  a  Jew  which  is  one  outwardly  in  the  flesh ;  but  he  is  a 
Jew  which  is  one  inwardly  ;  and  circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart, 
in  the  spirit,  and  not  in  the  letter,  whose  praise  is  not  of  men,  but  of 
God,"  Rom.  ii,  28.  "And  the  Lord  thy  God  will  circumcise 
thine  heart,  and  the  heart  of  thy  seed,  to  love  the  Lord  thy  God 
with  all  thine  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  that  thou  mayest  live," 
Deut.  xxx,  6.  "  Circumcise  yourselves  to  the  Lord,  and  take 
away  the  foreskins  of  your  heart,  ye  men  of  Judah,  and  inhabit- 
ants of  Jerusalem,"  Jer.  iv,  3.  It  was  the  sign  also  of  peculiar 
relation  to  God,  as  his  people :  "  Only  the  Lord  had  a  delight  in 
thy  fathers  to  love  them,  and  he  chose  their  seed  after  them,  even 
you  above  all  people  as  it  is  this  day.  Circumcise,  therefore, 
the  foreskin  of  your  heart,  and  be  no  more  stiff  necked,"  Deut. 
x,  15,  16. 

In  all  these  respects,  baptism,  as  a  sign  of  the  new  covenant, 
corresponds  to  circumcision.  Like  that,  its  administration  is  a 
constant  exhibition  of  the  placability  of  God  to  man  ;  like  that,  it 
is  the  initiatory  rite  into  a  covenant  which  promises  pardon  and 
salvation  to  a  true  faith,  of  which  it  is  the  outward  profession  ;  like 
that,  it  is  the  symbol  of  regeneration,  the  washing  away  of  sin,  and 
"  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  and  like  that,  it  is  a  sign  of 
peculiar  relation  to  God,  Christians  becoming,  in  consequence, 

40* 


378  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

"  a  chosen  generation,  a  peculiar  people," — his  "  church"  on  earth, 
as  distinguished  from  "the  world."  "  For  we,"  says  the  Apostle, 
"are  the  circumcision,"  we  are  that  peculiar  people  and  church 
now,  which  was  formerly  distinguished  by  the  sign  of  circumcision, 
"  who  worship  God  in  the  spirit,  and  rejoice  in  Christ  Jesus,  and 
have  no  confidence  in  the  flesh." 

But  as  a  sign  baptism  is  more  than  circumcision ;  because  the 
covenant,  under  its  new  dispensation,  was  not  only  to  offer  pardon 
upon  believing,  deliverance  from  the  bondage  of  fleshly  appetites, 
and  a  peculiar  spiritual  relation  to  God,  all  of  Avhich  we  find  under 
the  Old  Testament ;  but  also  to  bestow  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  his 
fulness,  upon  all  believers  ;  and  of  this  effusion  of  "  the  Power 
from  on  High,"  baptism  was  made  the  visible  sign ;  and  perhaps 
for  this,  among  some  other  obvious  reasons,  was  substituted  for 
circumcision,  because  baptism  by  effusion,  or  pouring,  (the  New 
Testament  mode  of  baptizing,  as  we  shall  afterwards  show,)  was  a 
natural  symbol  of  this  heavenly  gift.  The  baptism  of  John  had 
special  reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  was  not  to  be  adminis- 
tered by  him,  but  by  Christ  who  should  come  after  him.  This 
gift  only  honoured  John's  baptism  once,  in  the  extraordinary  case 
of  our  Lord ;  but  it  constantly  followed  upon  the  baptism  adminis- 
tered by  the  Apostles  of  Christ,  after  his  ascension,  and  "  the 
sending  of  the  promise  of  the  Father."  Then  Peter  said  unto  them. 
"Repent,  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you  for  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Acts  ii,  17. 
"  According  to  his  mercy  he  saved  us  by  the  washing  of  regene- 
ration, and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  he  shed,"  or  poured 
out,  "on  us  abundantly  through  Jesus  Christ."  For  this  reason 
Christianity  is  called  "  the  ministration  of  the  Spirit ;"  and  so  far  is 
this  from  being  confined  to  the  miraculous  gifts  often  bestowed  in 
the  first  age  of  the  Church,  that  it  is  made  the  standing  and  pro- 
minent test  of  true  Christianity  to  "  be  led  by  the  Spirit," — "  If 
any  man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his."  Of  this 
great  new  covenant  blessing,  baptism  was  therefore  eminently  the 
sign ;  and  it  represented  "  the  pouring  out"  of  the  Spirit,  "  the 
descending"  of  the  Spirit,  the  "  falling"  of  the  Spirit  "  upon  men," 
by  the  mode  in  which  it  was  administered,  the  pouring  of  water 
from  above  upon  the  subjects  baptized. 

As  a  seal  also,  or  confirming  sign,  baptism  answers  to  circum- 
cision. By  the  institution  of  the  latter,  a  pledge  was  constantly 
given  by  the  Almighty  to  bestow  the  spiritual  blessings  of  which 
the  rite  was  the  sign,  pardon  and  sanctification  through  faith  in  the 
future  Seed  of  Abraham ;  peculiar  relation  to  Him  as  "his  people ;" 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  379 

and  the  heavenly  inheritance.  Of  the  same  blessings,  baptism  is 
also  the  pledge,  along  with  that  higher  dispensation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  which  it  specially  represents  in  emblem.  Thus  in  baptism 
there  is  on  the  part  of  God  a  visible  assurance  of  his  faithfulness 
to  his  covenant  stipulations.  But  it  is  our  seal  also  ;  it  is  that  act 
by  which  we  make  ourselves  parties  to  the  covenant,  and  thus  "  set 
to  our  seal,  that  God  is  true."  In  this  respect  it  binds  us,  as,  in 
the  other,  God  mercifully  binds  himself  for  the  stronger  assurance 
of  our  faith.  We  pledge  ourselves  to  trust  wholly  in  Christ  for 
pardon  and  salvation,  and  to  obey  his  laws  ; — "  teaching  them  '  to 
observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you:'"  in  that 
rite  also  we  undergo  a  mystical  death  unto  sin,  a  mystical  separa- 
tion fiom  the  world,  which  St.  Paul  calls  being  "  buried  with  Christ 
in  or  by  baptism  ;"  and  a  mystical  resurrection  to  newness  of  life, 
through  Christ's  resurrection  from  the  dead.  Thus  in  circumcision, 
an  obligation  of  faith  in  the  promises  made  to  Abraham,  and  an 
obligation  to  holiness  of  life,  and  to  the  observance  of  the  Divine 
laws,  was  contracted ;  and  Moses,  therefore,  in  a  passage  above 
quoted,  argues  from  that  peculiar  visible  relation  of  the  Israelites 
to  God,  produced  by  outward  circumcision,  to  the  duty  of  circum- 
cising the  heart :  "  The  Lord  had  a  delight  in  thy  fathers  to  love 
them,  and  he  chose  their  seed  after  them,  even  you  above  all 
people ;  circumcise  therefore  the  foreskin  of  your  heart," 
Deut.  x,  15. 

If  then  we  bring  all  these  considerations  under  one  view,  we 
shall  find  it  sufficiently  established  that  baptism  is  the  sign  and  seal 
of  the  covenant  of  grace  under  its  perfected  dispensation ; — that 
it  is  the  grand  initiatory  act  by  which  we  enter  into  this  covenant, 
in  order  to  claim  all  its  spiritual  blessings,  and  to  take  upon  our- 
selves all  its  obligations  ; — that  it  was  appointed  by  Jesus  Christ  in 
a  manner  which  plainly  put  it  in  the  place  of  circumcision ; — that 
it  is  now  the  means  by  which  men  become  Abraham's  spiritual 
children,  and  heirs  with  him  of  the  promise,  which  was  the  office 
of  circumcision,  until  "  the  Seed,"  the  Messiah,  should  come  ; — 
and  that  baptism  is  therefore  expressly  called  by  St.  Paul  "the 
circumcision  of  Christ,"  or  Christian  circumcision,  in  a  sense 
which  can  only  import  that  baptism  has  now  taken  the  place  of 
the  Abrahamic  rite. 

The  only  objection  of  any  plausibility  which  has  been  urged  by 
Anti-pa?dobaptist  writers  against  the  substitution  of  baptism  for 
circumcision,  is  thus  stated  by  Mr.  Booth  :  "  If  baptism  succeeded 
m  the  place  of  circumcision,  how  came  it  that  both  of  them  were 
in  full  force  at  the  same  time,  that  is.  from  the  commencement  of 


380  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES  [PART 

John's  ministry  to  the  death  of  Christ  1  For  one  thing  to  come  in 
the  room  of  another,  and  the  latter  to  hold  its  place,  is  an  odd  kind 
of  succession.  Admitting  the  succession  pretended,  how  came  it 
that  Paul  circumcised  Timothy,  after  he  had  been  baptized?' 
That  circumcision  was  practised  along  with  baptism  from  John 
the  Baptist's  ministry  to  the  death  of  Christ  may  be  very  readily 
granted,  without  affecting  the  question ;  for  baptism  could  not  be 
made  the  sign  and  seal  of  the  perfected  covenant  of  grace,  until 
that  covenant  was  both  perfected,  and  fully  explained  and  proposed 
for  acceptance,  which  did  not  take  place  until  after  "  the  blood  of 
the  everlasting  covenant"  was  shed,  and  our  Lord  had  opened  its 
full  import  to  the  Apostles  who  were  to  publish  it  "to  all  nations" 
after  his  resurrection.  Accordingly  we  find  that  baptism  was  form- 
ally made  the  rite  of  initiation  into  this  covenant  for  the  first  time, 
when  our  Lord  gave  commission  to  his  disciples  to  "  go  and  teach 
all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost," — "he  that  believeth  and  is  baptized 
shall  be  saved."  John's  baptism  was  upon  profession  of  repentance, 
and  faith  in  the  speedy  appearance  of  Him  who  was  to  baptize 
with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  fire  ;  and  our  Lord's  baptism  by  his 
disciples  was  administered  to  those  Jews  that  believed  on  him,  as 
the  Messias,  all  of  whom,  like  the  Apostles,  waited  for  a  fuller 
deveiopement  of  his  character  and  offices.  For  since  the  new 
covenant  was  not  then  fully  perfected,  it  could  not  be  proposed  in 
any  other  way  than  to  prepare  them  that  believed  in  Christ,  by  its 
partial  but  increasing  manifestation  in  the  discourses  of  our  Lord, 
for  the  full  declaration  both  of  its  benefits  and  obligations  ;  which 
declaration  was  not  made  until  after  his  resurrection.  Whatever 
the  nature  and  intent  of  that  baptism  which  our  Lord  by  his  disci- 
ples administered  might  be,  (a  point  on  which  we  have  no  informa- 
tion,) like  that  of  John  it  looked  to  something  yet  to  come,  and  was 
not  certainly  that  baptism  in  the  name  "  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  which  was  afterward  instituted  as  the 
standing  initiatory  rite  into  the  Christian  Church.  As  for  the  cir- 
cumcision of  Timothy,  and  the  practice  of  that  rite  among  many 
of  the  Hebrew  believers,  it  has  already  been  accounted  for.  If 
indeed  the  Baptist  writers  could  show  that  the  Apostles  sanctioned 
the  practice  of  circumcision  as  a  seal  of  the  old  covenant,  either 
as  it  was  Abrahamic  or  Mosaic,  or  both,  then  there  would  be  some 
force  in  the  argument,  that  one  could  not  succeed  the  other,  if  both 
were  continued  under  inspired  authority.  But  we  have  the  most 
decided  testimony  of  the  Apostle  Paul  against  any  such  use  of 
circumcision;  and  he  makes  it,  when  practised  in  that  view,  a 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   IKSTITUTES.  381 

total  abnegation  of  Christ  and  the  new  covenant.  It  follows  then, 
that,  when  circumcision  was  continued  by  any  connivance  of  the 
Apostles. — and  certainly  they  did  no  more  than  connive  at  it, — it 
was  practised  upon  some  grounds  which  did  not  regard  it  as  the 
seal  of  any  covenant,  from  national  custom,  or  prejudice,  a  feeling 
to  which  the  Apostle  Paul  himself  yielded  in  the  case  of  Timothy. 
He  circumcised  him,  but  not  from  any  conviction  of  necessity, 
since  he  uniformly  declared  circumcision  to  have  vanished  away 
with  that  dispensation  of  the  covenant  of  which  it  was  the  seal, 
through  the  bringing  in  of  a  better  hope. 

We  may  here  add,  that  an  early  Father,  Justin  Martyr,  takes  the 
same  view  of  the  substitution  of  circumcision  by  Christian  baptism  : 
"  We,  Gentiles,"  Justin  observes,  "  have  not  received  that  circum- 
cision according  to  the  flesh,  but  that  which  is  spiritual — and  more- 
over, for  indeed  we  were  sinners,  we  have  received  this  in  baptism, 
through  God's  mercy,  and  it  is  enjoined  on  all  to  receive  it  in  like 
manner." 

II.  The  nature  of  baptism  having  been  thus  explained,  we  may 
proceed  to  consider  its  subjects. 

That  believers  are  the  proper  subjects  of  baptism,  as  they  were 
of  circumcision,  is  beyond  dispute.  As  it  would  have  been  a  mon- 
strous perversion  of  circumcision  to  have  administered  it  to  any 
person,  being  of  adult  age,  who  did  not  believe  in  the  true  and 
living  God,  and  in  the  expected  "  Seed  of  Abraham,"  in  whom  all 
nations  were  to  be  blessed  ;  so  is  faith  in  Christ  also  an  indispensa- 
ble condition  for  baptism  in  all  persons  of  mature  age  :  and  no 
Minister  is  at  liberty  to  take  from  the  candidate  the  visible  pledge 
of  his  acceptance  of  the  terms  of  God's  covenant,  unless  he  has 
been  first  taught  its  nature,  promises,  and  obligations,  and  gives 
sufficient  evidence  of  the  reality  of  his  faith,  and  the  sincerity  of 
his  profession  of  obedience.  Hence  the  administration  of  baptism 
was  placed  by  our  Lord  only  in  the  hands  of  those  who  were  il  to 
preach  the  Gospel,"  that  is,  of  those  who  were  to  declare  God's 
method  of  saving  men  "  through  faith  in  Christ,"  and  to  teach  them 
"to  observe  all  things,  whatsoever  Christ  had  commanded  them." 
Circumcision  was  connected  with  teaching,  and  belief  of  the  truth 
taught ;  and  so  also  is  Christian  baptism. 

The  question,  however,  which  now  requires  consideration  is, 
whether  the  infant  children  of  believing  parents  are  entitled  to  be 
made  parties  to  the  covenant  of  grace,  by  the  act  of  their  parents, 
and  the  administration  of  baptism  1 

In  favour  of  infant  baptism,  the  following  arguments  may  be 
adduced.     Some  of  them  are  more  direct  than  others  ;  but  the 


382  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES,  [PART 

reader  will  judge  whether,  taken  all  together,  they  do  not  establish 
this  practice  of  the  Church,  continued  to  us  from  the  earliest  ages, 
upon  the  strongest  basis  of  scriptural  authority. 

1 .  As  it  has  been  established,  that  baptism  was  put  by  our  Lord 
bimself  and  his  Apostles  in  the  room  of  circumcision,  as  an  ini- 
tiatory rite  into  the  covenant  of  grace ;  and  as  the  infant  children  of 
believers  under  the  Old  Testament  were  entitled  to  the  covenant 
benefits  of  the  latter  ordinance,  and  the  children  of  Christian  be- 
lievers are  not  expressly  excluded  from  entering  into  the  same 
covenant  by  baptism ;  the  absence  of  such  an  explicit  exclusion  is 
sufficient  proof  of  their  title  to  baptism. 

For  if  the  covenant  be  the  same  in  all  its  spiritual  blessings,  and 
an  express  change  was  made  by  our  Lord  in  the  sign  and  seal  of 
that  covenant,  but  no  change  at  all  in  the  subjects  of  it,  no  one  can 
have  a  right  to  carry  that  change  further  than  the  Lawgiver  him- 
self, and  to  exclude  the  children  of  believers  from  entering  his  cove- 
nant by  baptism,  when  they  had  always  been  entitled  to  enter  into 
it  by  circumcision.  This  is  a  censurable  interference  with  the 
authority  of  God  ;  a  presumptuous  attempt  to  fashion  the  new 
dispensation  in  this  respect  so  as  to  conform  it  to  a  mere  human 
opinion  of  fitness  and  propriety.  For  to  say,  that,  because  bap- 
tism is  directed  to  be  administered  to  believers  when  adults  are 
spoken  of,  it  follows  that  children  who  are  not  capable  of  personal 
faith  are  excluded  from  baptism,  is  only  to  argue  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  if  it  were  contended,  that,  because  circumcision,  when  adults 
were  the  subjects,  was  only  to  be  administered  to  believers,  there- 
fore infants  were  excluded  from  that  ordinance,  which  is  contrary 
to  the  fact.  This  argument  will  not  certainly  exclude  them  from 
baptism  by  way  of  inference,  and  by  no  act  of  the  Maker  and  Me- 
diator of  the  covenant  are  they  shut  out. 

2.  If  it  had  been  intended  to  exclude  infants  from  entering  into 
the  new  covenant  by  baptism,  the  absence  of  every  prohibitory  ex- 
pression to  this  effect  in  the  New  Testament,  must  have  been  mis- 
leading to  all  men  ;  and  especially  to  the  Jewish  believers. 

Baptism  was  no  new  ordinance  when  our  Lord  instituted  it, 
though  he  gave  to  it  a  particular  designation.  It  was  in  his  practice 
to  adapt,  in  several  instances,  what  he  found  already  established,  to 
the  uses  of  his  religion.  "A  parable,  for  instance,  was  the  Jewish 
mode  of  teaching.  Who  taught  by  parables  equal  to  Jesus  Christ  ? 
And  what  is  the  most  distinguished  and  appropriate  rite  of  his  reli- 
gion, but  a  service  grafted  on  a  Passover  custom  among  the  Jews 
of  his  day  ?  It  was  not  ordained  by  Moses,  that  a  part  of  the 
bread  they  had  used  in  the  Passover  should  be  the  last  thing  they 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  383 

ate  after  that  supper ;  yet  this  our  Lord  took  as  he  found  it,  and 
converted  it  into  a  memorial  of  his  body.  The  'cup  of  blessing' 
has  no  authority  whatever  from  the  original  institution ;  yet  this 
our  Lord  found  in  use,  and  adopted  as  a  memorial  of  his  blood : — 
taken  together,  these  elements  form  one  commemoration  of  his 
death,  Probability,  arising  to  rational  certainty,  therefore,  would 
lead  us  to  infer,  that  whatever  rite  Jesus  appointed  as  the  ordinance 
of  admission  into  the  community  of  his  followers,  he  would  also 
adopt  from  some  service  already  existing — from  some  token  fami- 
liar among  the  people  of  his  nation. 

"  In  fact,  we  know  that  '  divers  baptisms'  existed  under  the  law, 
and  we  have  every  reason  to  believe,  that  the  admission  of  prose- 
lytes into  the  profession  of  Judaism,  was  really  and  truly  marked 
by  a  washing  with  water  in  a  ritual  and  ceremonial  manner,  I  have 
always  understood  that  Maimonides  is  perfectly  correct  when  he 
says,  '  In  all  ages,  when  a  Heathen  (or  a  stranger  by  nation)  icas 
willing  to  enter  into  the  covenant  of  Israel,  and  gather  himself  under 
the  wings  of  the  majesty  of  God,  and  take  upon  himself  the  yoke  of 
the  law — he  must  be  first  circumcised,  and  secondly  baptized,  and 
thirdly  bring  a  sacrifice ;  or  if  the  party  were  a  woman,  then  she  must 
be  first  baptized,  and  secondly  bring  a  sacrifice.''  He  adds,  lAt  this 
present  time  when  (the  temple  being  destroyed)  there  is  no  sacrificing, 
a  stranger  must  be  first  circumcised,  and  secondly  baptized.' 

"  Dr.  Gill,  indeed,  in  his  Dissertation  on  Jewish  Proselyte  Bap- 
tism, has  ventured  the  assertion,  that  '  there  is  no  mention  made  of 
any  rite  or  custom  of  admitting  Jewish  Proselytes  by  baptism,  in 
any  writings  or  records  before  the  time  of  John  the  Baptist,  Christ 
and  his  Apostles  ;  nor  in  any  age  after  them,  for  the  first  three  or 
four  hundred  years ;  or,  however,  before  the  writing  of  the  Tal- 
muds.''  But  the  learned  Doctor  has  not  condescended  to  under- 
stand the  evidence  of  this  fact.  It  does  not  rest  on  the  testimony 
of  Jewish  records  solely;  it  was  in  circulation  among  the  Heathen, 
as  we  learn  from  the  clear  and  demonstrative  testimony  of  Epic- 
tetus,  who  has  these  words :  (He  is  blaming  those  who  assume  the 
profession  of  Philosophy  without  acting  up  to  it :)  '  Why  do  you 
call  yourself  a  Stoic  1  Why  do  you  deceive  the  multitude  1  Why 
do  you  pretend  to  be  a  Greek,  when  you  are  a  Jew  ?  a  Syrian  ?  an 
Egyptian  ?  And  when  we  see  any  one  wavering,  we  are  wont  to 
say,  This  is  not  a  Jew,  but  acts  one.  But  when  he  assumes  the 
sentiments  of  one  who  hath  been  baptized  and  circumcised,  then  he 
both  really  is,  and  is  called,  a  Jew.  Thus  we,  falsifying  our  pro- 
fession, are  Jews  in  name,  but  in  reality  something  else.' 

"  This  practice  then  of  the  Jews, — proselyte  baptism, — was  so 


384  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

notorious  to  the  Heathen  in  Italy  and  in  Greece,  that  it  furnished 
this  philosopher  with  an  object  of  comparison.  Now,  Epictetus 
lived  to  be  very  old :  He  is  placed  by  Dr.  Lardner,  A.  D.  109,  by 
he  Clerc,  A.  D.  104.  He  could  not  be  less  than  sixty  years  of 
age  when  he  wrote  this ;  and  he  might  obtain  his  information  thirty 
or  forty  years  earlier,  which  brings  it  up  to  the  time  of  the  Apostles. 
Those  who  could  think  that  the  Jews  could  institute  proselyte  bap- 
tism at  the  very  moment  when  the  Christians  were  practising  bap- 
tism as  an  initiatory  rite,  are  not  to  be  envied  for  the  correctness  of 
their  judgment.  The  rite  certainly  dates  much  earlier,  probably 
many  ages.  I  see  no  reason  for  disputing  the  assertion  of  Mai- 
monides,  notwithstanding  Dr.  Gill's  rash  and  fallacious  language 
on  the  subject." (3) 

This  baptism  of  proselytes,  as  Lightfoot  has  fully  showed,  was 
a  baptism  of  families,  and  comprehended  their  infant  children  ;  and 
the  rite  was  a  symbol  of  their  being  washed  from  the  pollution  of 
idolatry.  Very  different  indeed  in  the  extent  of  its  import  and  office 
was  Christian  baptism  to  the  Jewish  baptisms  ;  nevertheless,  this 
shows  that  the  Jews  were  familiar  with  the  rite  as  it  extended  to 
children,  in  cases  of  conversions  from  idolatry ;  and,  as  far  at  least 
as  the  converts  from  paganism  to  Christianity  were  concerned,  they 
could  not  but  understand  Christian  baptism  to  extend  to  the  infant 
children  of  Gentile  proselytes,  unless  there  had  been,  what  we  no 
where  find  in  the  discourses  of  Christ  and  the  writings  of  the  Apos- 
tles, an  express  exception  of  them.  In  like  manner,  their  own  prac- 
tice oi  infant  circumcision  must  have  misled  them  ;  for  if  they  were 
taught  that  baptism  was  the  initiatory  seal  of  the  Christian  cove- 
nant, and  had  taken  the  place  of  circumcision,  which  St.  Paul  had 
informed  them  was  "  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  which  is  by  faith," 
how  should  they  have  understood  that  their  children  were  no  longer 
to  be  taken  into  covenant  with  God,  as  under  their  own  former 
religion,  unless  they  had  been  told  that  this  exclusion  of  children 
from  all  covenant  relation  to  God,  was  one  of  those  peculiarities  of 
the  Christian  dispensation  in  which  it  differed  from  the  religion  of 
the  Patriarchs  and  Moses  1  This  was  surely  a  great  change  ;  a 
change  which  must  have  made  great  impression  upon  a  serious  and 
affectionate  Jewish  parent,  who  could  now  no  longer  covenant 
with  God  for  his  children,  or  place  his  children  in  a  special  cove- 
nant relation  to  the  Lord  of  the  whole  earth  ;  a  change  indeed  so 
great, — a  placing  of  the  children  of  Christian  parents  in  so  infe- 
rior, and,  so  to  speak,  outcast  a  condition,  in  comparison  of  the 

(3)  Facts  and  Evidences  on  the  Subject  of  Baptism. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  3S5 

children  of  believing  Jews,  whilst  the  Abrahamic  covenant  remained 
in  force, — that  not  only,  in  order  to  prevent  mistake,  did  it  require 
an  express  enunciation,  but  in  the  nature  of  the  thing  it  must  have 
given  rise  to  so  many  objections,  or  at  least  inquiries,  that  expla- 
nations of  the  reason  of  this  peculiarity  might  naturally  be  expected 
to  occur  in  the  writings  of  the  Apostles,  and  especially  in  those  of 
St.  Paul.  On  the  contrary,  the  very  phraseology  of  these  inspired 
men,  when  touching  the  subject  of  the  children  of  believers  only 
incidentally,  was  calculated  to  confirm  the  ancient  practice,  in 
opposition  to  what  we  are  told  is  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Gospel 
upon  this  point.  For  instance  :  how  could  the  Jews  have  under- 
stood the  words  of  Peter  at  the  Pentecost,  but  as  calling  both  upon 
them  and  their  children,  to  be  baptized  ? — "  Repent  and  be  bap- 
tized, for  the  promise  is  unto  you  and  to  your  children."  For 
that  both  are  included,  may  be  proved,  says  a  sensible  writer,  by 
considering, 

"  1.  The  resemblance  between  this  promise,  and  that  in  Gen. 
xvii,  7,  '  To  be  a  God  unto  thee,  and  unto  thy  seed  after  thee.' — 
The  resemblance  between  these  two  lies  in  two  things  :  (1.)  Each 
stands  connected  with  an  ordinance,  by  which  persons  were  to  be 
admitted  into  Church  fellowship  ;  the  one  by  circumcision,  the 
other  by  baptism.  (2.)  Both  agree  in  phraseology;  the  one  is, 
Ho  thee  and  thy  seed;'  the  other  is,  'to  you  and  your  children.' 
Now,  every  one  knows  that  the  word  seed  means  children ;  and 
that  children  means  seed ;  and  that  they  are  precisely  the  same. 
From  these  two  strongly  resembling  features,  viz.  their  connexion 
with  a  similar  ordinance,  and  the  sameness  of  the  phraseology, 
I  infer,  that  the  subjects  expressed  in  each,  are  the  very  same. 
And  as  it  is  certain  that  parents  and  infants  were  intended  by 
the  one  ;  it  must  be  equally  certain  that  both  are  intended  by 
the  other. 

"  2.  The  sense  in  which  the  speaker  must  have  understood  the 
sentence  in  question :  '  The  promise  is  to  you,  and  to  your  chil- 
dren.'— In  order  to  know  this,  we  must  consider  who  the  speaker 
was,  and  from  what  source  he  received  his  religious  knowledge. 
The  Apostle  was  a  Jew.  He  knew  that  he  himself  had  been 
admitted  in  infancy,  and  that  it  was  the  ordinary  practice  of  the 
Church  to  admit  infants  to  membership.  And  he  likewise  knew, 
that  in  this  they  acted  on  the  authority  of  that  place,  where  God 
promises  to  Abraham,  *  to  be  a  God  unto  him,  and  unto  his  seed.' 
Now,  if  the  Apostle  knew  all  this,  in  what  sense  could  he  under- 
stand the  term  children,  as  distinguished  from  their  parents'?  I 
have  said  that  rsxva,  children,  and  tfirepfxa,  seed,  mean  the  same 

Vot.  UI.  41 


386  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PAKT 

thing.  And  as  the  Apostle  well  knew  that  the  term  seed  intended 
infants,  though  not  mere  infants  only ;  and  that  infants  were  cir- 
cumcised and  received  into  the  Church  as  being  the  seed,  what 
else  could  he  understand  by  the  term  children,  when  mentioned 
with  their  parents  1  Those  who  will  have  the  Apostle  to  mean, 
by  the  term  children,  'adult  posterity'  only,  have  this  infelicity 
attending  them,  that  they  understand  the  term  differently  from 
all  other  men ;  and  they  attribute  to  the  Apostle  a  sense  of 
the  word,  which  to  him  must  have  been  the  most  forced  and 
infamiliar. 

"  3.  In  what  sense  his  hearers  must  have  understood  him,  when 
he  said,  '  The  promise  is  to  you,  and  to  your  children,' 

"  The  context  informs  us,  that  many  of  St.  Peter's  hearers,  as 
he  himself  was,  were  Jews.  They  had  been  accustomed  for  many 
hundred  years  to  receive  infants  by  circumcision  into  the  Church  ;; 
and  this  they  did,  as  before  observed,  because  God  had  promised 
to  be  a  God  to  Abraham  and  to  his  seed.  They  had  understood 
this  promise  to  mean  parents  and  their  infant  offspring,  and  this 
idea  was  become  familiar  by  the  practice  of  many  centuries.  What 
then  must  have  been  their  views,  when  one  of  their  own  commu- 
nity says  to  them,  '  The  promise  is  to  you  and  to  your  children  V 
If  their  practice  of  receiving  infants  was  founded  on  a  promise 
exactly  similar,  as  it  was,  how  could  they  possibly  understand  him, 
but  as  meaning  the  same  thing,  since  he  himself  used  the  same 
mode  of  speech  1  This  must  have  been  the  case,  unless  we  admit 
this  absurdity,  that  they  understood  him  in  a  sense  to  which  they 
had  never  been  accustomed. 

"  How  idle  a  thing  it  is,  in  a  Baptist,  to  come  with  a  lexicon 
in  his  hand,  to  inform  us  that  tsxvcc,  children,  means  posterity  * 
Certainly  it  does,  and  so  includes  the  youngest  infants. 

"  But  the  Baptists  will  have  it  that  rava,  children,  in  this  place, 
means  only  adult  posterity.  And  if  so,  the  Jews  to  whom  he  spoke, 
unless  they  understood  St.  Peter  in  a  way  in  which  it  was  morally 
impossible  they  should,  would  infallibly  have  understood  him  wrong. 
Certainly,  all  men,  when  acting  freely,  will  understand  words  in 
that  way  which  is  most  familiar  to  them ;  and  nothing  could  be 
more  so  to  the  Jews,  than  to  understand  such  a  speech  as  Peter's 
to  mean  adults  and  infants. 

"We  should  more  certainly  come  at  the  truth,  if,  instead  of 
idly  criticising,  we  could  fancy  ourselves  Jews,  and  in  the  habit 
of  circumcising  infants,  and  receiving  them  into  the  Church  ;  and 
then  could  we  imagine  one  of  our  own  nation  and  religion  to 
address  us  in  the  very  language  of  Peter  in  this  text,  '  The  pro- 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  387 

mise  is  to  you  and  to  your  children  ;'  let  us  ask  ourselves  whether 
we  could  ever  suppose  him  to  mean  adult  posterity  only  !"(3) 

To  this  we  may  add  that  St.  Paul  calls  the  children  of  believers 
holy,  separated  to  God,  and  standing  therefore  in  a  peculiar  rela- 
tion to  him,  1  Cor.  vii,  14;  a  mode  of  speech  which  would  also 
have  been  wholly  unintelligible  at  least  to  a  Jew,  unless  by  some 
rite  of  Christianity  children  were  made  sharers  in  its  covenanted 
mercies. 

The  practice  of  the  Jews,  and  the  very  language  of  the  Apos- 
tles, so  naturally  leading  therefore  to  a  misunderstanding  of  this 
sacrament,  if  infant  baptism  be  not  a  Christian  rite,  and  that  in 
respect  of  its  subjects  themselves,  it  was  the  more  necessary  that 
some  notice  of  the  exclusion  of  infants  from  the  Christian  covenant 
should  have  been  given  by  -way  of  guard.  And  as  we  find  no 
intimation  of  this  prohibitory  kind,  we  may  confidently  conclude 
that  it  was  never  the  design  of  Christ  to  restrict  this  ordinance  to 
adults  only. 

3.  Infant  children  are  declared  by  Christ  to  be  members  of 
his  Church. 

That  they  were  made  members  of  God's  Church  in  the  family 
of  Abraham,  and  among  the  Jews,  cannot  be  denied.  They  were 
made  so  by  circumcision,  which  was  not  that  carnal  and  merely 
political  rite  which  many  Baptist  writers  in  contradiction  to  the 
Scriptures  make  it,  but  was,  as  we  have  seen,  the  seal  of  a  spiritual 
covenant,  comprehending  engagements  to  bestow  the  remission  of 
sins  and  all  its  consequent  blessings  in  this  life,  and,  in  another,  the 
heavenly  Canaan.  Among  these  blessings  was  that  special  rela- 
tion, which  consisted  in  becoming  a  visible  and  peculiar  people  of 
God,  his  Church.  This  was  contained  in  that  engagement  of  the 
covenant,  "  I  will  be  to  them  a  God,  and  they  shall  be  to  me  a 
people  ;"  a  promise,  which,  however  connected  with  temporal 
advantages,  was,  in  its  highest  and  most  emphatic  sense,  wholly 
spiritual.  Circumcision  was  therefore  a  religious,  and  not  a  mere 
political  rite,  because  the  covenant,  of  which  it  was  the  seal,  was 
in  its  most  ample  sense  spiritual.  If  therefore  we  had  no  direct 
authority  from  the  words  of  Christ  to  declare  the  infant  children  of 
believers  competent  to  become  the  members  of  his  Church,  the  two 
circumstances, — that  the  Church  of  God,  which  has  always  been 
one  Church  in  all  ages,  and  into  which  the  Gentiles  are  now 
introduced,  formerly  admitted  infants  to  membership  by  circum- 
cision,— and  that  the  mode  of  initiation  into  it  only  has  been  changed, 

(3)  Edwards  On  Baptism. 


3SS  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  not  the  subjects,  (of  which  we  have  no  intimation,)  would 
themselves  prove  that  baptism  admits  into  the  Christian  Church 
both  believing  parents  and  their  children,  as  circumcision  admitted 
both.  The  same  Church  remains  ;  for  "  the  olive  tree"  is  not 
destroyed  ;  the  natural  branches  only  are  broken  off,  and  the  Gen- 
tiles graffed  in,  and  "  partake  of  the  root  and  fatness  of  the  olive 
tree,"  that  is,  of  all  the  spiritual  blessings  and  privileges  heretofore 
enjoyed  by  the  Jews,  in  consequence  of  their  relation  to  God  as 
his  Church.  But  among  these  spiritual  privileges  and  blessings, 
was  the  right  of  placing  their  children  in  covenant  with  God ;  the 
membership  of  the  Jews  comprehended  both  children  and  adults  ; 
and  the  grafting  in  of  the  Gentiles,  so  as  to  partake  of  the  same 
"  root  and  fatness,"  will  therefore  include  a  right  to  put  their 
children  also  into  the  covenant,  so  that  they  as  well  as  adults 
may  become  members  of  Christ's  Church,  have  God  to  be  "  their 
God,"  and  be  acknowledged  by  him,  in  the  special  sense  of  the 
terms  of  the  covenant,  to  be  his  "  people." 

But  we  have  our  Lord's  direct  testimony  to  this  point,  and  that 
in  two  remarkable  passages,  Luke  ix,  47,  48,  "  And  Jesus  took  a 
child  and  set  him  by  him,  and  he  said  unto  them,  Whosoever  shall 
receive  this  child  in  my  name,  receiveth  me  ;  and  whosoever  shall 
receive  me,  receiveth  him  that  sent  me  ;  for  he  that  is  least  among 
you  all,  the  same  shall  be  great."  We  grant  that  this  is  an  instance 
of  teaching  by  parabolic  action.  The  intention  of  Christ  was  to 
impress  the  necessity  of  humility  and  teachableness  upon  his 
disciples,  and  to  afford  a  promise,  to  those  who  should  receive 
them  in  his  name,  of  that  special  grace  which  was  implied  in 
receiving  himself.  But  then,  were  there  not  a  correspondence 
of  circumstances  between  the  child  taken  by  Jesus  in  his  arms, 
and  the  disciples  compared  to  this  child,  there  would  be  no  force, 
no  propriety,  in  the  action,  and  the  same  truth  might  have  been 
as  forcibly  stated  without  any  action  of  this  kind  at  all.  Let  then 
these  correspondences  be  remarked  in  order  to  estimate  the  amount 
of  their  meaning.  The  humility  and  docility  of  the  true  disciple 
corresponded  with  the  same  dispositions  in  a  young  child ;  and 
the  "  receiving  a  disciple  in  the  name"  of  Christ  corresponds  with 
the  receiving  of  a  child  in  the  name  of  Christ,  which  can  only  mean 
the  receiving  of  each  with  kindness,  on  account  of  a  religious  rela- 
tion between  each  and  Christ,  which  religious  relation  can  only 
be  well  interpreted  of  a  Church  relation.  This  is  further  confirmed 
by  the  next  point  of  correspondence,  the  identity  of  Christ  both 
with  the  disciple  and  the  child,  "Whosoever  shall  receive  this 
child  in  my  name  receiveth  me ;"  but  such  an  identity  of  Christ 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  389 

with  his  disciples  stands  wholly  upon  their  relation  to  him  as  mem- 
bers of  his  mystical  "  body,  the  Church."  It  is  in  this  respect  only 
that  they  are  "one  with  him ;"  and  there  can  be  no  identity  of 
Christ  with  "little  children"  but  by  virtue  of  the  same  relation, 
that  is,  as  they  are  members  of  his  mystical  body,  the  Church  ;  of 
which  membership,  baptism  is  now,  as  circumcision  was  then,  the 
initiatory  rite.  That  was  the  relation  in  which  the  very  child  he 
then  took  up  in  his  arms  stood  to  him  by  virtue  of  its  circumcision  ; 
it  was  a  member  of  his  Old  Testament  Church ;  but,  as  he  is 
speaking  of  the  disciples  as  the  future  teachers  of  his  perfected 
covenant,  and  their  reception  in  his  name  under  that  character, 
he  manifestly  glances  at  the  Church  relationship  of  children  to 
him  to  be  established  by  the  baptism  to  be  instituted  in  his  perfect 
dispensation. 

This  is,  however,  expressed  still  more  explicitly  in  Mark  x,  14, 
"  But  when  Jesus  saw  it  he  was  much  displeased,  and  said  unto 
them,  Suffer  the  little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them 

not ;  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God  : and  he  took  them 

up  in  his  arms,  put  his  hands  upon  them,  and  blessed  them." 
Here  the  children  spoken  of  are  "  little  children,"  of  so  tender  an 
age,  that  our  Lord  "  took  them  up  in  his  arms."  The  purpose  for 
which  they  were  brought  was  not,  as  some  of  the  Baptist  writers 
would  suggest,  that  Christ  should  heal  them  of  diseases  ;  for  though 
St.  Mark  says,  "  They  brought  young  children  to  Christ  that  he 
might  touch  them,,"  this  is  explained  by  St.  Matthew,  who  says, 
"  that  he  should  put  his  hands  upon  them,  and  pray ;"  and  even 
in  the  statement  of  St.  Mark,  x,  16,  it  is  not  said  that: our  Lord 
healed  them,  but  "  put  his  hands  upon  them,  and  blessed  them  ;" 
which  clearly  enough  shows  that  this  was  the  purpose  for  which 
they  were  brought  by  their  parents  to  Christ.  Nor  is  there  any 
evidence  that  it  was  the  practice  among  the  Jews,  for  common 
unofficial  persons  to  put  their  hands  upon  the  heads  of  those  for 
whom  they  prayed.  The  parents  here  appear  to  have  been  among 
those  who  believed  Christ  to  be  a  Prophet,  "  that  Prophet,"  or  the 
Messias ;  and  on  that  account  earnestly  desired  his  prayers  for 
their  children,  and  his  official  blessing  upon  them.  That  official 
blessing, — the  blessing  which  he  was  authorized  and  empowered 
to  bestow  by  virtue  of  his  Messiahship, — he  was  so  ready,  we 
might  say  so  anxious,  to  bestow  upon  them,  that  he  was  "much 
displeased"  with  his  disciples  who  "rebuked  them  that  brought 
them,"  and  gave  a  command  which  was  to  be  in  force  in  all  future 
time, — "  Suffer  the  little  children  to  come  unto  me,"  in  order  to 
receive  my  official  blessing;  "for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God." 

41* 


390  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

The  first  evasive  criticism  of  the  Baptist  writers  is,  that  the  phrase 
"  of  such,"  means  of  such-like,  that  is,  of  adults  being  of  a  child- 
like disposition ;  a  criticism  Avhich  takes  away  all  meaning  from 
the  words  of  our  Lord.     For  what  kind  of  reason  was  it  to  offer 
for  permitting  children  to  come  to  Christ  to  receive  his  blessing, 
that  persons  not  children,  but  who  were  of  a  child-like  disposition,, 
were  the  subjects  of  the  kingdom  of  God  1    The  absurdity  of  this 
is  its  own  refutation,  since  the  reason  for  children  being  permitted 
to  come,  must  be  found  in  themselves,  and  not  in  others.     The 
second  attempt  to  evade  the  argument  from  this  passage  is,  to  under- 
stand "  the  kingdom  of  God,"  or  "  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  as  St. 
Matthew  has  it,  exclusively  of  the  heavenly  state.     We  gladly 
admit,  in  opposition  to  the  Calvinistic  Baptists,  that  all  children, 
dying  before   actual   sin   committed,   are   admitted  into  heaven 
through  the  merits  of  Christ ;  but  for  this  very  reason  it  follows 
that  infants  are  proper  subjects  to  be  introduced  into  his  Church 
on  earth.     The  phrases,  "  the  kingdom  of  God,"  and  "  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,"  are,  however,  more  frequently  used  by  our  Lord 
to  denote  the  Church  in  this  present  world,  than  in  its  state  of 
glory ;  and  since  all  the  children  brought  to  Christ  to  receive  his 
blessing  were  not  likely  to  die  in  their  infancy,  it  could  not  be 
affirmed,  that  "  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  if  that  be 
understood  to  mean  the  state  of  future  happiness  exclusively.    As 
children,  they  might  all  be  members  of  the  Church  on  earth ;  but 
not  all  as  children,  members  of  the  Church  in  heaven,  seeing  they 
might  live  to  become  adult,  and  be  cast  away.    Thus,  therefore,  if 
children  are  expressly  declared  to  be  members  of  Christ's  Church, 
then  are  they  the  proper  subjects  of  baptism,  which  is  the  initiatory 
rite  into  every  portion  of  that  Church  which  is  visible. 
But  let  this  case  be  more  particularly  considered. 
Take  it  that  by  **  the  kingdom  of  God,"  or  "  of  heaven,"  our 
Lord  means  the  glorified  state  of  his  Church ;  it  must  be  granted 
that  none  can  enter  into  heaven  who  are  not  redeemed  by  Christ, 
and  who  do  not  stand  in  a  vital  relation  to  him  as  members  of  his 
mystical  body,  or  otherwise  we  should  place  human  and  fallen 
beings  in  that  heavenly  state  who  are  unconnected  with  Christ 
as  their  Redeemer,  and  uncleansed  by  him  as  the  Sanctifier  of 
his  redeemed.     Now,  this  relation  must  exist  on  earth,  before  it 
can  exist  in  heaven  ;  or  else  we  assign  the  work  of  sanctifying  the 
fallen  nature  of  man  to  a  future  state,  which  is  contrary  to  the 
Scriptures.    If  infants,  therefore,  are  thus  redeemed  and  sanctified 
in  their  nature,  and  are  before  death  made  "  meet  for  the  inherit- 
ance of  the  saints  in  light ;"  so  that  in  this  world  they  are  nlaced 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  391 

in  the  same  relation  to  Christ  as  an  adult  believer,  who  derives 
sanctifying  influence  from  him,  they  are  therefore  the  members  of 
his  Church, — they  partake  the  grace  of  the  covenant,  and  are 
comprehended  in  that  promise  of  the  covenant,  "  I  will  be  to  them 
a  God,  and  they  shall  be  to  me  a  people."  In  other  words,  they 
are  made  members  of  Christ's  Church,  and  are  entitled  to  be  recog- 
nised as  such  by  the  administration  of  the  visible  sign  of  initiation 
into  some  visible  branch  of  it.  If  it  be  asked,  "  Of  what  import 
then  is  baptism  to  children,  if  as  infants  they  already  stand  in  a 
favourable  relation  to  Christ  ]"  the  answer  is,  that  it  is  of  the  same 
import  as  circumcision  was  to  Abraham,  which  was  "  a  seal  of  the 
righteousness  of  the  faith  which  he  had  yet  being  imcircumcised  :"' 
it  confirmed  all  the  promises  of  the  covenant  of  grace  to  him,  and 
made  the  Church  of  God  visible  to  men.  It  is  of  the  same  import 
as  baptism  to  the  Eunuch,  who  had  faith  already,  and  a  willing- 
ness to  submit  to  the  rite  before  it  was  administered  to  him.  He 
stood  at  that  moment  in  the  condition,  not  of  a  candidate  for  intro- 
duction into  the  Church,  but  of  an  accepted  candidate ;  he  was 
virtually  a  member,  although  not  formally  so,  and  his  baptism  was 
not  merely  a  sign  of  his  faith,  but  a  confirming  sign  of  God's  cove- 
nant relation  to  him  as  a  pardoned  and  accepted  man,  and  gave 
him  a  security  for  the  continuance  and  increase  of  the  grace  of 
the  covenant,  as  he  was  prepared  to  receive  it.  In  like  manner,  in 
the  case  of  all  truly  believing  adults  applying  for  baptism,  their  rela- 
tion to  Christ  is  not  that  of  mere  candidates  for  membership  with 
his  Church,  but  that  of  accepted  candidates,  standing  already  in  a 
vital  relation  to  him,  but  about  to  receive  the  seal  which  was  to 
confirm  that  grace,  and  its  increase  in  the  ordinance  itself,  and  in 
future  time.  Thus  this  previous  relation  of  infants  to  Christ,  as 
accepted  by  him,  is  an  argument  for  their  baptism,  not  against  it, 
seeing  it  is  by  that  they  are  visibly  recognised  as  the  formal  mem- 
bers of  his  Church,  and  have  the  full  grace  of  the  covenant  con- 
firmed and  sealed  to  them,  with  increase  of  grace  as  they  are  fitted 
to  receive  it,  besides  the  advantage  of  visible  connexion  with  the 
Church,  and  of  that  obligation  which  is  taken  upon  themselves  by 
their  parents  to  train  them  up  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of 
the  Lord. 

In  both  views  then,  "  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God," — members 
of  his  Church  on  earth,  and  of  his  Church  in  heaven,  if  they  die  in 
infancy,  for  the  one  is  necessarily  involved  in  the  other.  No  one 
can  be  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  heaven,  who  does  not  stand  in  a 
vital  sanctifying  relation  to  Christ  as  the  head  of  his  mystical  body, 
the  Church,  on  earth ;  and  no  one  can  be  of  the  kingdom  of  God 


392  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES,  [PART 

on  earth,  a  member  of  his  true  Church,  and  die  in  that  relation, 
without  entering  that  state  of  glory  to  which  his  adoption  on  earth; 
makes  him  an  heir,  through  Christ. 

4.  The  argument  from  apostolic  practice  next  offers  itself.   Tha>i 
practice  was  to  baptize  the  houses  of  them  that  believed. 

The  impugners  of  infant  baptism  are  pleased  to  argue  much  from 
the  absence  of  all  express  mention  of  the  baptism  of  infants  in  the 
New  Testament  This  however  is  easily  accounted  for,  when  it  is 
considered  that  if,  as  we  have  proved,  baptism  took  the  place  of  cir- 
cumcision, the  baptism  of  infants  was  so  much  a  matter  of  course, 
as  to  call  for  no  remark.  The  argument  from  silence  on  this  sur>- 
ject  is  one  which  least  of  all  the  Baptists  ought  to  dwell  upon,  since,, 
as  we  have  seen,  if  it  had  been  intended  to  exclude  children  from 
the  privilege  of  being  placed  in  covenant  with  God,  which  privilege 
they  unquestionably  enjoyed  under  the  Old  Testament,  this  extra- 
ordinary alteration,  which  could  not  but  produce  remark,  required 
to  be  particularly  noted,  both  to  account  for  it  to  the  mind  of  an 
affectionate  Jewish  parent,  and  to  guard  against  that  mistake  into 
which  we  shall  just  now  show  Christians  from  the  earliest  times 
fell,  since  they  administered  baptism  to  infants.  It  may  further  be 
observed,  that,  as  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  events  narrated 
there  did  not  require  the  express  mention  of  the  baptism  of  infants, 
as  an  act  separate  from  the  baptism  of  adults.  That  which  called 
for  the  administration  of  baptism  at  that  period,  as  now,  when  the 
Gospel  is  preached  in  a  heathen  land,  was  the  believing  of  adult 
persons,  not  the  case  of  persons  already  believing,  bringing  their 
children  for  baptism.  On  the  supposition  that  baptism  was  admin- 
istered to  the  children  of  the  parents  who  thus  believed,  at  the  same 
time  as  themselves,  and  in  consequence  of  their  believing,  it  may 
be  asked  how  the  fact  could  be  more  naturally  expressed,  when  it 
was  not  intended  to  speak  of  infant  baptism  doctrinally  or  distinctly, 
than  that  such  a  one  was  baptized,  "  and  all  his  house ;"  just  as  a 
similar  fact  would  be  distinctly  recorded  by  a  modern  Missionary 
writing  to  a  Church  at  home  practising  infant  baptism,  and  having 
no  controversy  on  the  subject  in  his  eye,  by  saying  that  he  baptized 
such  a  Heathen,  at  such  a  place,  with  all  his  family.  For,  without 
going  into  any  criticism  on  the  Greek  term  rendered  house,  it  cannot 
be  denied  that,  like  the  old  English  word  employed  in  our  transla- 
tion, and  also  like  the  word  family,  it  must  be  understood  to  com- 
prehend either  the  children  only,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  domestics, 
or  both. 

If  we  take  the  instances  of  the  baptism  of  whole  "houses,"  as 
recorded  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  they  must  be  understood  as 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  393 

marking-  the  common  mode  of  proceeding;  among;  the  first  preach- 
ers of  the  Gospel  when  the  head  or  heads  of  a  family  believed,  or 
as  insulated  and  peculiar  instances.  If  the  former,  which,  from 
what  may  be  called  the  matter  of  course  manner  in  which  the  cases 
are  mentioned,  is  most  probable  ;  then  innumerable  instances  must 
have  occurred  of  the  baptizing  of  houses  or  families,  just  as  many 
in  fact  as  there  were  of  the  conversion  of  heads  of  families  in  the 
apostolic  age.  That  the  majority  of  these  houses  must  have  included 
infant  children  is  therefore  certain,  and  it  follows  that  the  Apostles 
practised  infant  baptism. 

But  let  the  cases  of  the  baptism  of  houses  mentioned  in  the  New 
Testament  be  put  in  the  most  favourable  light  for  the  purpose  of 
the  Baptists  ;  that  is,  let  them  be  considered  as  insulated  and  pecu- 
liar, and  not  as  instances  of  apostolic  procedure  in  all  cases  where 
the  heads  of  families  were  converted  to  the  faith,  still  the  Baptist  is 
obliged  to  assume,  that  neither  in  the  house  of  the  Philippian  jailer, 
nor  in  that  of  Lydia,  nor  in  that  of  Stephanas,  were  there  any  infants 
at  all,  since,  if  there  were,  they  were  comprehended  in  the  whole 
houses  which  were  baptized  upon  the  believing  of  their  respective 
heads.  This  at  least  is  improbable,  and  no  intimation  of  this  pecu- 
liarity is  given  in  the  history. 

The  Baptist  writers,  however,  think  that  they  can  prove  that  all 
the  persons  included  in  these  houses  were  adults ;  and  that  the 
means  of  showing  this  from  the  Scriptures  is  an  instance  of  "  the 
care  of  Providence  watching  over  the  sacred  cause  of  adult  bap- 
tism ;"  thus  absurdly  assuming  that  even  if  this  point  could  be  made 
out  the  whole  controversy  is  terminated,  when  in  fact  this  is  but 
an  auxiliary  argument  of  very  inferior  importance  to  those  above- 
mentioned.  But  let  us  examine  their  supposed  proofs.  "With 
respect  to  the  jailer,"  they  tell  us,  that  "  we  are  expressly  assured, 
that  the  Apostles  spoke  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  all  that  were  in 
his  house ;"  which  we  grant  must  principally,  although  not  of  neces- 
sity exclusively,  refer  to  those  who  were  of  sufficient  age  to  under- 
stand their  discourse.  And  "  that  he  rejoiced,  believing  in  God 
with  all  his  house ;"  from  which  the  inference  is,  that  none  but 
adult  hearers,  and  adult  believers,  were  in  this  case  baptized.  If  so, 
then  there  could  be  no  infant  children  in  the  house  ;  which,  as  the 
jailer  appears  from  his  activity  to  have  been  a  man  in  the  vigour  of 
life,  and  not  aged,  is  at  least  far  from  being  certain.  But  if  it  be  a 
proof  in  this  case  that  there  were  no  infant  children  in  the  jailer's 
family,  that  it  is  said,  he  believed  and  all  his  house ;  this  is  not  the 
only  believing  family  mentioned  in  Scripture  from  which  infants 
must  be  excluded.     For,  to  say  nothing  of  the  houses  of  Lydia 


394  THEOLO'GICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  Stephanas,  the  nobleman  at  Capernaum  is  said  to  have  be- 
lieved "  and  all  his  house"  John  iv,  53  ;  so  that  we  are  to  conclude 
that  there  were  no  infant  children  in  this  house  also,  although  his 
sick  son  is  not  said  to  be  his  only  offspring,  and  that  son  is  called  by 
him  a  child,  the  diminutive  term  zsaidtov  being  used.  Again,  Corne- 
lius is  said,  Acts  x,  2,  to  be  "one  that  feared  God,  and  all  his  house." 
Infant  children  therefore  must  be  excluded  from  his  family  also; 
and  also  from  that  of  Crispus,  who  is  said  to  have  "  believed  on  the 
Lord  with  all  his  house ;"  which  house  appears,  from  what  imme- 
diately follows,  to  have  been  baptized.  These  instances  make  it 
much  more  probable  that  the  phrases  "  fearing  Cod  with  all  his 
house,"  and  "  believing  with  all  his  house,"  include  young  children 
under  the  believing  adults,  whose  religious  profession  they  would 
follow,  and  whose  sentiments  they  would  imbibe,  so  that  they  might 
be  called  a  Christian  family,  than  that  so  many  houses  or  families 
should  have  been  constituted  only  of  adult  persons,  to  the  entire 
exclusion  of  children  of  tender  years.  In  the  case  of  the  jailer's 
house,  however,  the  Baptist  argument  manifestly  halts  ;  for  it  is  not 
said,  that  they  only  to  whom  the  word  of  the  Lord  was.  spoken 
were  baptized  ;  nor  that  they  only  who  "believed"  and  "i^jpiced" 
with  the  iailer  were  baptized.  The  account  of  the  baptism  is  given 
in  a  separate  verse,  and  in  different  phrase :  "  And  he  took  them 
the  same  hour  of  the  night,  and  washed  their  stripes,  and  was  bap- 
tized, he,  and  all  his"  all  belonging  to  him,  "  straightway  ;"  where 
there  is  no  limitation  of  the  persons  who  were  baptized  to  the  adults 
only  by  any  terms  which  designate  them  as  persons  "hearing,"  or 
"  believing." 

The  next  instance  is  that  of  Lydia.  The  words  of  the  writer  of 
the  Acts  are,  "Who  when  she  was  baptized,  and  her  house."  The 
great  difficulty  of  the  Baptists  is,  to  make  a  house  for  Lydia  with- 
out any  children  at  all,  young  or  old.  This,  however,  cannot  be 
proved  from  the  term  itself,  since  the  same  word  is  that  commonly 
used  in  the  Scripture  to  include  children  residing  at  home  with 
their  parents :  "  One  that  ruleth  well  his  own  house,  having  his 
children  in  subjection  with  all  gravity."  It  is  however  conjectured, 
first,  that  she  had  come  a  trading  voyage,  from  Thyatira  to  Philippi, 
to  sell  purple  ;  as  if  a  woman  of  Thyatira  might  not  be  settled  in 
business  at  Philippi  as  a  seller  of  this  article.  Then,  as  if  to  mark 
more  strikingly  the  hopelessness  of  the  attempt  to  torture  this  pas- 
sage to  favour  an  opinion,  "  her  house"  is  made  to  consist  of  jour- 
neymen dyers,  "  employed  in  preparing  the  purple  she  sold ;" 
which,  however,  is  a  notion  at  variance  with  the  former ;  for  if  she 
was  on  a  mere  trading  voyage,  if  she  had  brought  her  purple  goods 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  395 

from  Thyatira  to  Philippi  to  sell,  she  most  probably  brought  them 
ready  dyed,  and  would  have  no  need  of  a  dying  establishment, 
To  complete  the  whole,  these  journeymen  dyers,  although  not  a 
word  is  said  of  their  conversion,  nor  even  of  their  existence,  in  the 
whole  story,  are  raised  into  "  the  brethren,"  (a  term  which  mani- 
festly denotes  the  members  of  the  Philippian  Church,)  whom  Paul 
and  Silas  are  said  to  have  seen  and  comforted  in  the  house  of 
Lydia,  before  they  departed  ! 

All,  however,  that  the  history  states  is,  that  "  the  Lord  opened 
Lydia's  heart,  that  she  attended  unto  the  things  which  were  spoken- 
of  Paul,"  and  that  she  was  therefore  "  baptized  and  her  house." 
From  this  house  no  one  has  the  least  authority  to  exclude  children, 
even  young  children,  since  there  is  nothing  in  the  history  to  war- 
rant the  above  mentioned  conjectures,  and  the  word  is  in  Scripture 
used  expressly  to  include  them.  All  is  perfectly  gratuitous  on  the 
part  of  the  Baptists ;  but,  whilst  there  is  nothing  to  sanction  the 
manner  in  which  they  deal  with  this  text,  there  is  a  circumstance 
strongly  confirmatory  of  the  probability  that  the  house  of  Lydia, 
according  to  the  natural  import  of  the  word  rendered  house  or 
family,,  contained  children,  and  that  in  an  infantile  state.  This  is, 
that  in  all  the  other  instances  in  which  adults  are  mentioned  as 
having  been  baptized  along  with  the  head  of  a  family,  they  are 
mentioned  as  "  hearing,"  and  "  believing,"  or  in  some  terms  which 
amount  to  this.  Cornelius  had  called  together  "  his  kinsmen  and 
near  friends  ;"  and  while  Peter  spake,  "  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  all 
them  which  heard  the  ivord,"  "  and  he  commanded  them  to  be  bap- 
tized." So  the  adults  in  the  house  of  the  jailer  at  Philippi  were 
persons  to  whom  "  the  word  of  the  Lord"  was  spoken ;  and 
although  nothing  is  said  of  the  faith  of  any  but  the  jailer  himself, — 
for  the  words  are  more  properly  rendered,  "  and  he,  believing  in 
God,  rejoiced  with  all  his  house," — yet  is  the  joy  which  appears  to 
have  been  felt  by  the  adult  part  of  his  house,  as  well  as  by  himself, 
to  be  attributed  to  their  faith.  Now,  as  it  does  not  appear  that  the 
Apostles,  although  they  baptized  infant  children,  baptized  unbe- 
lieving adult  servants  because  their  masters  or  mistresses  believed, 
and  yet  the  house  of  Lydia  were  baptized  along  with  herself,  when 
no  mention  at  all  is  made  of  the  Lord  "  opening  the  heart"  of  these 
adult  domestics,  nor  of  their  believing,  the  fair  inference  is,  that 
"  the  house"  of  Lydia  means  her  children  only,  and  that  being  of 
immature  years  they  were  baptized  with  their  mother  according  to 
the  common  custom  of  the  Jews,  to  baptize  the  children  of  prose- 
lyted Gentiles  along  with  their  parents,  from  which  practice 
Christian  baptism  appears  to  have  been  taken. 


396  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [FART 

The  third  instance  is  that  of  "  the  house  of  Stephanas,"  men- 
tioned by  St.  Paul,  1  Cor.  i,  16,  as  having  been  baptized  by  himself. 
This  family  also,  it  is  argued,  must  have  been  all  adults,  because 
they  are  said  in  the  same  Epistle,  chap,  xvi,  15,  to  have  "addicted 
themselves  to  the  ministry  of  the  saints,"  and  further,  because  they 
were  persons  who  took  "  a  lead"  in  the  affairs  of  the  Church,  the 
Corinthians  being  exhorted  to  "  submit  themselves  unto  such,  and 
to  every  one  that  helpeth  with  us  and  laboureth."    To  understand 
this  passage  rightly,  it  is  however  necessary  to  observe,  that  Stepha- 
nas, the  head  of  this  family,  had  been  sent  by  the  Church  of  Corinth 
to  St.  Paul  at  Ephesus,  along  with  Fortunatus  and  Achaicus.    In 
the  absence  of  the  head  of  the  family,  the  Apostle  commends  "  the 
house,"  the  family,  of  Stephanas  to  the  regard  of  the  Corinthian 
believers,  and  perhaps  also  the  houses  of  the  two  other  brethren 
who  had  come  with  him ;  for  in  several  MSS.  marked  by  Gries- 
bach,  and  in  some  of  the  versions,  the  text  reads,  "  Ye  know  the 
house  of  Stephanas  and  Fortunatus,"  and  one  reads  also,  "  and  of 
Achaicus."     By  the  house  or  family  of  Stephanas,  the  Apostle 
must  mean  his  children,  or,  along  with  them,  his  near  relations 
dwelling  together  in  the  same  family ;  for,  since  they  are  com- 
mended for  their  hospitality  to  the  saints,  servants,  who  have  no 
power  to  show  hospitality,  are  of  course  excluded.     But,  in  the 
absence  of  the  head  of  the  family,  it  is  very  improbable  that  the 
Apostle  should  exhort  the  Corinthian  Church  to  "  submit,"  eccle- 
siastically, to  the  wife,  sons,  daughters,  and  near  relations  of  Ste- 
phanas, and,  if  the  reading  of  Griesbach's  MSS.  be  followed,  to  the 
family  of  Fortunatus,  and  that  of  Achaicus  also.     In  respect  of 
government,  therefore,  they  cannot  be  supposed  "to  have  had  a 
lead  in  the  Church,"  according  to  the  Baptist  notion,  and  especially 
as  the  heads  of  these  families  were  absent.     They  were  however 
the  oldest  Christian  families  in  Corinth,  the  house  of  Stephanas  at 
least  being  called  "  the  first  fruits  of  Achaia,"  and  eminently  dis- 
tinguished for  "  addicting  themselves,"  setting  themselves  on  system, 
to  the  work  of  ministering  to  the  saints,  that  is,  of  communicating 
to  the  poor  saints ;  entertaining  stranger  Christians,  which  was  an 
important  branch  of  practical  duty  in  the  primitive  Church,  that  in 
every  place  those  who  professed  Christ  might  be  kept  out  of  the 
society  of  idolaters ;  and  receiving  the  ministers  of  Christ.     On 
these  accounts  the  Apostle  commends  them  to  the  special  regard 
of  the  Corinthian  Church,  and  exhorts  "  tva  xai  t>;ji,s»s  vifvraMytfds  70% 
Toisrois,  that  you  range  yourselves  under  and  co-operate  with  them, 
and  with  every  one,"  also,  "  who  helpeth  with  us,  and  laboureth ;" 
the  military  metaphor  contained  in  s<r«fo:v  in  the  preceding  verse 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  397 

being  here  carried  forward.  These  families  were  the  oldest 
Christians  in  Corinth ;  and  as  they  were  foremost  in  every  good 
word  and  work,  they  were  not  only  to  be  commended,  but  the 
rest  were  to  be  exhorted  to  serve  under  them  as  leaders  in  these 
works  of  charity.  This  appears  to  be  the  obvious  sense  of  this 
otherwise  obscure  passage.  But  in  this,  or  indeed  in  any  other 
sense  which  can  be  given  to  it,  it  proves  no  more  than  that  there 
were  adult  persons  in  the  family  of  Stephanas,  his  wife,  and  sons, 
and  daughters,  who  were  distinguished  for  their  charity  and  hospi- 
tality. .  Still  it  is  to  be  remembered,  that  the  baptism  of  the  oldest 
of  the  children  took  place  several  years  before.  The  house  of 
Stephanas  "  was  the  first  fruits  of  Achaia,"  in  which  St.  Paul  began 
to  preach  not  later  than  A.  D.  51,  whilst  this  Epistle  could  not  be 
written  earlier  at  least  than  A.  D.  57,  and  might  be  later.  Six  or 
eight  years,  taken  from  the  age  of  the  sons  and  daughters  of  Ste- 
phanas, might  bring  the  oldest  to  the  state  of  early  youth,  and  as  to 
the  younger  branches  would  descend  to  the  term  of  infancy,  pro- 
perly so  called.  Still  further,  all  that  the  Apostle  affirms  of  the 
benevolence  and  hospitality  of  the  family  of  Stephanas  is  perfectly 
consistent  with  a  part  of  his  children  being  still  very  young  when 
he  wrote  the  Epistle.  An -equal  commendation  for  hospitality  and 
charity  might  be  given  in  the  present  day,  with  perfect  propriety, 
to  many  pious  families,  several  members  of  which  are  still  in  a  state 
of  infancy.  It  was  sufficient  to  warrant  the  use  of  such  expressions 
as  those  of  the  Apostle,  that  there  were  in  these  Corinthian  families 
a  few  adults,  whose  conduct  gave  a  decided  character  to  the  whole 
"house."  Thus  the  argument  used  to  prove  that  in  these  three 
instances  of  family  baptism,  there  were  no  young  children,  are 
evidently  very  unsatisfactory;  and  they  leave  us  to  the  conclusion, 
which  perhaps  all  would  come  to  in  reading  the  sacred  history, 
were  they  quite  free  from  the  bias  of  a  theory,  that  "  houses,"  or 
"  families,"  as  in  the  commonly  received  import  of  the  term,  must 
be  understood  to  comprise  children  of  all  ages,  unless  some  explicit 
note  of  the  contrary  appears,  which  is  not  the  case  in  any  of  the 
instances  in  question. 

5.  The  last  argument  may  be  drawn  from  the  antiquity  of  the 
practice  of  infant  baptism. 

If  the  baptism  of  the  infant  children  of  believers  was  not  prac- 
tised by  the  Apostles  and  by  the  primitive  Churches,  when  and 
where  did  the  practice  commence  1  To  this  question  the  Baptist 
writers  can  give  no  answer.  It  is  an  innovation,  according  to 
them,  not  upon  the  circumstances  of  a  sacrament,  but  upon  its 
essential  principle ;  and  yet  its  introduction  produced  no  struggle  ; 

Vol.  III.  42 


398  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

was  never  noticed  by  any  general  or  provincial  council ;   am  I 
excited  no  controversy !    This  itself  is  strong  presumptive  proof 
of  its  earhj  antiquity.     On  the  other  hand,  we  can  point  out  the 
only  ancient  writer  who  opposed  infant  baptism.     This  was  Ter- 
tullian, who  lived  late  in  the  second  century  ;  but  his  very  opposi- 
tion to  the  practice  proves,  that  that  practice  was  more  ancient 
than  himself;  and  the  principles  on  which  he  impugns  it,  further 
show  that  it  was  so.     He  regarded  this  sacrament  superstitious]}"  - 
he  appended  to  it  the  trine  immersion  in  the  name  of  each  of  the 
persons  of  the  Trinity ;  he  gives  it  gravely  as  a  reason  why  infants 
should  not  be  baptized,  that  Christ  says,  "  Suffer  the  little  children 
to  come  unto  me,"  therefore  they  must  stay  till  they  are  able  to 
come,  that  is,  till  they  are  grown  up ;  "  and  he  would  prohibit  the 
unmarried,  and  all  in  a  widowed  state,  from  baptism,  because  of" 
the  temptations  to  which  they  may  be  liable."   The  whole  of  this  i.« 
solved  by  adverting  to  that  notion  of  the  efficacy  of  this  sacrameiu 
in  taking  away  all  previous  sins,  which  then  began  to  prevail,  so 
that  an  inducement  was  held  out  for  delaying  baptism  as  long  as 
possible,  till  at  length,  in  many  cases,  it  was  postponed  to  the 
article  of  death,  under  the  belief  that  the  dying  who  received  this 
sacrament  were  the  more  secure  of  salvation.    Tertullian,  accord- 
ingly, with  all  his  zeal,  allowed  that  infants  ought  to  be  baptized  if 
their  lives  be  in  danger,  and  thus  evidently  shows  that  his  opposition 
to  the  .baptism  of  infants  in  ordinary,  rested  upon  a  very  different 
principle  from  that  of  the  modern.  Anti-paedobaptists.     Amidst  all 
his  arguments  against  this  practice,  Tertullian,  however,  never 
ventures  upon  one  which  would  have  been  most  to  his  purpose, 
and  which  might  most  forcibly  have  been  urged  had  not  baptism 
been  administered  to  infants  by  the  Apostles  and  their  immediate 
successors.    That  argument  would  have  been  the  novelty  of  the 
practice,  which  he  never  asserts,  and  which,  as  he  lived  so  early, 
he  might  have  proved,  had  he  had  any  ground  for  it.     On  the 
contrary,  Justin  Martyr,  and  IrenEeus,  in  the  second  century,  and 
Origen  in  the  beginning  of  the  third,  expressly  mention  infant  bap- 
tism as  the  practice  of  their  times,  and,  by  the  latter,  this  is  assigned 
to  apostolical  injunction.     Fidus,  an  African  bishop,  applied  to 
Cyprian,  bishop  of  Carthage,  to  know,  not  whether  infants  were 
to  be  baptized,  but  whether  their  baptism  might  take  place  before 
the  eighth  day  after  their  birth,  that  being  the  day  on  which  circum- 
cision was  performed  by  the  law  of  Moses.     This  question  was 
considered  in  an  African  synod,  held  A.  D.  254,  at  which  sixty-six 
bishops  were  present,  and  "  it  was  unanimously  decreed,  '  that  it 
was  not  necessary  to  defer  baptism  to  that  day;  and  that  the  grace 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  -399 

of  God,  or  baptism,  should  be  given  to  all,  and  especially  to  infants.'" 
This  decision  was  communicated  in  a  letter,  from  Cyprian  to  Fi- 
dus.(4)  We  trace  the  practice  also  downwards.  In  the  fourth 
century,  Ambrose  says,  that  "infants  who  are  baptized,  are  reformed 
from  wickedness  to  the  primitive  state  of  their  nature  ;"(5)  and  at 
the  end  of  that  century,  the  famous  controversy  took  place  between 
Augustine  and  Pelagius  concerning  original  sin,  in  which  the  uni- 
form practice  of  baptizing  infants  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles  was 
admitted  by  both  parties,  although  they  assigned  different  reasons 
tor  it.  So  little  indeed  were  Tertullian's  absurdities  regarded,  that 
he  appears  to  have  been  quite  forgotten  by  this  time  ;  for  Augustine 
says  he  never  heard  of  any  Christian,  catholic  or  sectary,  who 
taught  any  other  doctrine  than  that  infants  are  to  be  baptized.  (6) 
Infant  baptism  is  not  mentioned  in  the  canons  of  any  Council ;  nor 
is  it  insisted  upon  as  an  object  of  faith  in  any  creed ;  and  thence 
we  infer  that  it  was  a  point  not  controverted  at  any  period  of  the 
ancient  Church,  and  we  know  that  it  was  the  practice  in  all  esta- 
blished Churches.  Wall  says,  that  Peter  Bruis,  a  Frenchman,  who 
lived  about  the  year  1030,  whose  followers  were  called  Petrobrus- 
sians,  was  the  first  Anti-predobaptist  teacher  who  had  a  regular 
congregation.  (7)  The  Anabaptists  of  Germany  took  their  rise  in 
the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century ;  but  it  does  not  appear  that 
there  was  any  congregation  of  Anabaptists  in  England,  till  the  year 
1 640.  (8)  That  a  practice  which  can  be  traced  up  to  the  very  first 
periods  of  the  Church,  and  has  been,  till  within  very  modern  times, 
its  uncontradicted  practice,  should  have  a  lower  authority  than 
Apostolic  usage  and  appointment,  may  be  pronounced  impossible. 
It  is  not  like  one  of  those  trifling,  though  somewhat  superstitious, 
additions,  which  even  in  very  early  times  began  to  be  made  to  the 
.sacraments ;  on  the  contrary,  it  involves  a  principle  so  important 
as  to  alter  the  very  nature  of  the.  sacrament  itself.  For  if  personal 
faith  be  an  essential  requisite  of  baptism  in  all  cases  ;  if  baptism  be 
a  visible  declaration  of  this,  and  is  vicious  without  it ;  then  infant 
baptism  was  an  innovation  of  so  serious  a  nature,  that  it  must  have 
attracted  attention,  and  provoked  controversy,  which  would  have 
led,  if  not  to  the  suppression  of  the  error,  yet  to  a  diversity  of  prac- 
tice in  the  ancient  Churches,  which  in  point  of  fact  did  not  exist, 
Tertullian  himself  allowing  infant  baptism  in  extreme  cases. 

The  benefits  of  this  sacrament  require  to  be  briefly  exhibited. 
Baptism  introduces  the  adult  believer  into  the  covenant  of  grace, 

(4)  Cyp.  Ep.  59.  (5)  Comment,  in  Lucam,  c.  10.  (6)  De  Pecc.  Men. 

cap.  6.  (7)  Hist.  Part  2,  c.  7.  (8)  Bishop  Tomline's  Elements. 


400  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  the  Church  of  Christ ;  and  is  the  seal,  the  pledge,  to  him,  on 
the  part  of  God,  of  the  fulfilment  of  all  its  provisions,  in  time  and 
in  eternity ;  whilst,  on  his  part,  he  takes  upon  himself  the  obliga- 
tions of  steadfast  faith  and  obedience. 

To  the  infant  child,  it  is  a  visible  reception  into  the  same  cove- 
nant and  Church, — a  pledge  of  acceptance  through  Christ, — the 
bestowment  of  a  title  to  all  the  grace  of  the  covenant  as  circum- 
stances may  require,  and  as  the  mind  of  the  child  may  be  capable, 
or  made  capable,  of  receiving  it ;  and  as  it  may  be  sought  in  future 
life  by  prayer,  when  the  period  of  reason  and  moral  choice  shall 
arrive.  It  conveys  also  the  present  "  blessing"  of  Christ,  of  which 
we  are  assured  by  his  taking  children  in  his  arms,  and  blessing 
them  ;  which  blessing  cannot  be  merely  nominal,  but  must  be  sub- 
stantial and  efficacious.  It  secures,  too,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
in  those  secret  spiritual  influences,  by  which  the  actual  regeneration 
of  those  children  who  die  in  infancy  is  effected ;  and  which  are  a 
seed  of  life  in  those  who  are  spared,  to  prepare  them  for  instruction 
in  the  word  of  God,  as  they  are  taught  it  by  parental  care,  to  incline 
their  will  and  affections  to  good,  and  to  begin  and  maintain  in  them 
the  war  against  inward  and  outward  evil,  so  that  they  may  be 
divinely  assisted,  as  reason  strengthens,  to  make  their  calling  and 
election  sure.  In  a  word,  it  is,  both  as  to  infants  and  to  adults,  the 
sign  and  pledge  of  that  inward  grace,  which,  although  modified  in 
its  operations  by  the  difference  of  their  circumstances,  has  respect 
to,  and  flows  from,  a  covenant  relation  to  each  of  the  three  persons 
in  whose  one  name  they  are  baptized, — acceptance  by  the  Father, 
— union  with  Christ  as  the  head  of  his  mystical  body,  the  Church, 
— and  "the  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  To  these  advan- 
tages must  be  added  the  respect  which  God  bears  to  the  believing 
act  of  the  parents,  and  to  their  solemn  prayers  on  the  occasion,  in 
both  which  the  child  is  interested  ;  as  well  as  in  that  solemn  engage- 
ment of  the  parents  which  the  rite  necessarily  implies,  to  bring  up 
their  child  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord* 

To  the  parents  it  is  a  benefit  also.  It  assures  them  that  God 
will  not  only  be  their  God  ;  but  "  the  God  of  their  seed  after 
them  ;"  it  thus  gives  them,  as  the  Israelites  of  old,  the  right  to 
covenant  with  God  for  their  "  little  ones,"  and  it  is  a  consoling 
pledge  that  their  dying  infant  offspring  shall  be  saved ;  since  he 
who  says,  "Suffer  little  children  to  come  unto  me,"  has  added, 
"  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  They  are  reminded  by 
it  also  of  the  necessity  of  acquainting  themselves  with  God's  cove- 
nant, that  they  may  diligently  teach  it  to  their  children  ;  and  that, 
as  they  have  covenanted  with  God  for  their  children,  they  are 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  401 

bound  thereby  to  enforce  the  covenant  conditions  upon  them  as 
they  come  to  years, — by  example,  as  well  as  by  education ;  by 
prayer,  as  well  as  by  profession  of  the  name  of  Christ. 
III.  The  mode  of  baptism  remains  to  be  considered.  ' 
Although  the  manner  in  which  the  element  of  water  is  applied 
in  baptism  is  but  a  circumstance  of  this  sacrament,  it  will  not  be  a 
matter  of  surprise  to  those  who  reflect  upon  the  proneness  of  men 
to  attach  undue  importance  to  comparative  trifles,  that  it  has  pro- 
duced so  much  controversy.  The  question  as  to  the  proper  subjects 
of  baptism  is  one  which  is  to  be  respected  for  its  importance  ;  that 
as  to  the  mode  has  occupied  more  time,  and  excited  greater  feeling, 
than  it  is  in  any  view  entitled  to.  It  cannot,  however,  be  passed 
over,  because  the  advocates  for  immersion  are  often  very  trouble- 
some to  their  fellow  Christians,  unsettle  weak  minds,  and  some- 
times perhaps,  from  their  zeal  for  a  form,  endanger  their  nwn 
spirituality.  Against  the  doctrine  that  the  only  legitimate  mode  of 
baptizing  is  by  immersion,  we  may  first  observe  that  there  are 
several  strong  presumptions. 

1 .  It  is  not  probable,  that  if  immersion  were  the  only  allowable 
mode  of  baptism,  it  should  not  have  been  expressly  enjoined. 

2.  It  is  not  probable,  that  in  a  religion  designed  to  be  universal, 
a  mode  of  administering  this  ordinance  should  be  obligatory,  the 
practice  of  which  is  ill  adapted  to  so  many  climates,  where  it 
would  either  be  exceedingly  harsh  to  immerse  the  candidates, 
male  and  female,  strong  and  feeble,  in  water  ;  or,  in  some  places, 
as  in  the  higher  latitudes,  for  a  great  part  of  the  year,  impossible. 
Even  if  immersion  were  in  fact  the  original  mode  of  baptizing  in 
the  name  of  Christ,  these  reasons  make  it  improbable  that  no 
accommodation  of  the  form  should  take  place,  without  vitiating 
the  ordinance.  This  some  of  the  stricter  Baptists  assert,  although 
they  themselves  depart  from  the  primitive  mode  of  partaking  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  in  accommodation  to  the  customs  of  their 
country. 

3.  It  is  still  more  unlikely,  that  in  a  religion  of  mercy  there 
should  be  no  consideration  of  health  and  life  in  the  administration 
of  an  ordinance  of  salvation,  since  it  is  certain  that  in  countries 
where  cold  bathing  is  little  practised,  great  risk  of  both  is  often 
incurred,  especially  in  the  case  of  women  and  delicate  persons  of 
either  sex,  and  fatal  effects  do  sometimes  occur. 

4.  It  is  also  exceedingly  improbable,  that  in  such  circumstances 
of  climate,  and  the  unfrequent  use  of  the  bath,  a  mode  of  bap- 
tizing should  have  been  appointed,  which,  from  the  shivering,  the 
"jobbing,  and  other  bodily  uneasiness  produced,  should  distract  the 

42* 


402  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

thoughts,  and  unfit  the  mind  for  a  collected  performance  of  a  reli- 
gious and  solemn  act  of  devotion. 

5.  It  is  highly  improbable  that  the  three  thousand  converts  at 
the  Pentecost,  who,  let  it  be  observed,  were  baptized  on  the  same 
clay,  were  all  baptized  by  immersion ;  or  that  the  jailer  and  "  all 
his"  were  baptized  in  the  same  manner  in  the  night,  although  the 
Baptists  have  invented  "  a  tank  or  bath  in  the  prison  at  Philippi" 
for  that  purpose. 

Finally,  it  is  most  of  all  improbable,  that  a  religion  like  the 
Christian,  so  scrupulously  delicate,  should  have  enjoined  the 
immersion  of  women  by  men,  and  in  the  presence  of  men.  In 
an  after  age,  when  immersion  came  into  fashion,  baptisteries,  and 
rooms  for  women,  and  changes  of  garments,  and  other  auxiliaries 
to  this  practice,  came  into  use,  because  they  were  found  necessary 
to  derp.nc.y ;  but  there  could  be  no  such  conveniences  in  the  first 
instance  ;  and  accordingly  we  read  of  none.  With  all  the  arrange- 
ments of  modern  times,  baptism  by  immersion  is  not  a  decent 
practice  ;  there  is  not  a  female,  perhaps,  who  submits  to  it,  who 
has  not  a  great  previous  struggle  with  her  delicacy  ;  but  that,  at 
a  time  when  no  such  accommodations  could  be  had  as  have  since 
been  found  necessary,  such  a  ceremony  should  have  been  con- 
stantly performing  wherever  the  Apostles  and  first  preachers 
went,  and  that  at  pools  and  rivers,  in  the  presence  of  many  spec- 
tators, and  they  sometimes  unbelievers  and  scolfers,  is  a  thing  not 
rationally  credible. 

We  grant  that  the  practice  of  immersion  is  ancient ;  and  so  are 
many  other  superstitious  appendages  to  baptism,  which  were 
adopted  under  the  notion  of  making  the  rite  more  emblematical 
and  impressive.  We  not  only  trace  immersion  to  the  second 
century,  but  immersion  three  times,  anointing  with  oil,  signing 
with  the  sign  of  the  cross,  imposition  of  hands,  exorcism,  eating 
milk  and  honey,  putting  on  of  white  garments,  all  connected  with 
baptism,  and  first  mentioned  by  Tertullian  ;  the  invention  of  men 
like  himself,  who  with  much  genius  and  eloquence  had  little  judg- 
ment, and  were  superstitious  to  a  degree  worthy  of  the  darkest 
ages  which  followed.  It  was  this  authority  for  immersion  which 
led  Wall,  and  other  writers  on  the  side  of  infant  baptism,  to  sur- 
render the  point  to  the  Anti-paedobaptists,  and  to  conclude  that 
immersion  was  the  Apostolic  practice.  Several  national  Churches 
too,  like  our  own,  swayed  by  the  same  authority,  are  favourable  to 
immersion,  although  they  do  not  think  it  binding,  and  generally 
practise  effusion  or  sprinkling. 

Neither  Tertullian  nor  Cyprian  was,  however,  so  strenuous  for 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  403 

immersion  as  to  deny  the  validity  of  baptism  by  aspersion  or  effusion. 
In  cases  of  sickness  or  weakness  they  only  sprinkled  water  upon 
the  face,  which  we  suppose  no  modern  Baptist  would  allow.  Clinic 
baptism  too,  or  the  baptism  of  the  sick  in  bed,  by  aspersion,  is 
allowed  by  Cyprian  to  be  valid ;  so  that  "  if  the  persons  recover 
they  need  not  be  baptized  by  immersion." (9)  Gennadius  of  Mar- 
seilles, in  the  fifth  century,  says,  that  baptism  was  administered  in 
the  Gallic  Church,  in  his  time,  indifferently  by  immersion  or  by 
sprinkling.  In  the  thirteenth  century,  Thomas  Aquinas  says, 
"  that  baptism  may  be  given,  not  only  by  immersion,  but  also  by 
effusion  of  water,  or  sprinkling  with  it."  And  Erasmus  affirms,(l) 
that  in  his  time  it  was  the  custom  to  sprinkle  infants  in  Holland 
and  to  dip  them  in  England.  Of  these  two  modes,  one  only  was 
primitive  and  Apostolic.  Which  that  was  we  shall  just  now  con- 
sider. At  present  it  is  only  necessary  to  observe,  that  immersion 
is  not  the  only  mode  which  can  plead  antiquity  in  its  favour  ;  and 
that,  as  the  superstition  of  antiquity  appears  to  have  gone  most  in 
favour  of  baptism  by  immersion,  this  is  a  circumstance  which 
affords  a  strong  presumption,  that  it  was  one  of  those  additions  to 
the  ancient  rite  which  superstition  originated.  This  may  be  made 
out  almost  to  a  moral  certainty,  without  referring  at  all  to  the 
argument  from  Scripture.  The  "  ancient  Christians,"  the  "primi- 
tive Christians,"  as  they  are  called  by  the  advocates  of  immersion, 
that  is,  Christians  of  about  the  age  of  Tertullian  and  Cyprian,  and 
a  little  downward, — whose  practice  of  immersion  is  used  as  an 
argument  to  prove  that  mode  only  to  have  had  Apostolic  sanction, 
— baptized  the  candidates  naked.  Thus  Wall  in  his  History  of 
Baptism :  "  The  ancient  Christians,  when  they  were  baptized  by 
immersion,  were  all  baptized  naked,  whether  they  were  men,  wo- 
men, or  children.  They  thought  it  better  represented  the  putting 
off  of  the  old  man,  and  also  the  nakedness  of  Christ  on  the  cross  ; 
moreover,  as  baptism  is  a  washing,  they  judged  it  should  be  the 
washing  of  the  body,  not  of  the  clothes."  This  is  an  instance  of 
the  manner  in  which  they  affected  to  improve  the  emblematical 
character  of  the  ordinance.  Robinson  also,  in  his  History  of 
Baptism,  states  the  same  thing  :  "  Let  it  be  observed,  that  the 
primitive  Christians  baptized  naked.  There  is  no  ancient  histo- 
rical fact  better  authenticated  than  this."  "  They,  however,"  says 
Wall,  "  took  great  care  for  preserving  the  modesty  of  any  woman 
who  was  to  be  baptized.  None  but  women  came  near  till  her 
body  was  in  the  water ;  then  the  Priest  came,  and  putting  her 

(O)Epist.  69.  (l)Epist.  76. 


404  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

head  also  under  water,  he  departed,  and  left  her  to  the  women." 
Now,  if  antiquity  be  pleaded  as  a  proof  that  immersion  was  the 
really  primitive  mode  of  baptizing,  it  must  be  pleaded  in  favour  of 
the  gross  and  offensive  circumstance  of  baptizing  naked,  which 
was  considered  of  as  much  importance  as  the  other  ;  and  then  we 
may  safely  leave  it  for  any  one  to  say  whether  he  really  believes 
that  the  three  thousand  persons  mentioned  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  were  baptized  naked  ?  and  whether,  when  St.  Paul  bap- 
tized Lydia,  she  was  put  into  the  water  naked  by  her  women, 
and  that  the  Apostle  then  hastened  "  to  put  her  head  under  water 
also,  using  the  form  of  baptism,  and  retired,  leaving  her  to  the 
women"  to  take  her  away  to  dress  1  Immersion,  with  all  its  appen- 
dages, dipping  three  times,  nakedness,  unction,  the  eating  of  milk 
and  honey,  exorcism,  &c,  bears  manifest  marks  of  that  disposition 
to  improve  upon  God's  ordinances,  for  which  even  the  close  of  the 
second  century  was  remarkable,  and  which  laid  the  foundation  of 
that  general  corruption  which  so  speedily  followed. 

But  we  proceed  to  the  New  Testament  itself,  and  deny  that 
a  single  clear  case  of  baptism  by  immersion  can  be  produced 
from  it. 

The  word  itself,  as  it  has  been  often  shown,  proves  nothing. 
The  verb,  with  its  derivatives,  signifies  to  dip  the  hand  into  a  dish, 
Matt,  xxvi,  23 ;  to  stain  a  vesture  with  blood,  Rev.  xix,  13;  to 
wet  the  body  with  dew,  Dan.  iv,  33 ;  to  paint  or  smear  the  face 
with  colours ;  to  stain  the  hand  by  pressing  a  substance  ;  to  be 
overwhelmed  in  the  waters  as  a  sunken  ship ;  to  be  drowned  by 
falling  into  water  ;  to  sink,  in  the  neuter  sense  ;  to  immerse  totally ; 
to  plunge  up  to  the  neck ;  to  be  immersed  up  to  the  middle ;  to 
be  drunken  with  wine  ;  to  be  dyed,  tinged,  and  imbued  ;  to  wash 
by  effusion  of  water ;  to  pour  water  upon  the  hands,  or  any  other 
part  of  the  body ;  to  sprinkle.  A  word  then  of  such  large  appli- 
cation affords  as  good  proof  for  sprinkling,  or  partial  dipping,  or 
washing  with  water,  as  for  immersion  in  it.  The  controversy  on 
this  accommodating  word  has  been  carried  on  to  weariness ;  and 
if  even  the  advocates  of  immersion  could  prove,  what  they  have 
not  been  able  to  do,  that  plunging  is  the  primary  meaning  of  the 
term,  they  would  gain  nothing,  since,  in  Scripture,  it  is  notoriously 
used  to  express  other  applications  of  water.  The  Jews  had  "  divers 
baptisms"  in  their  service ;  but  these  washings  of  the  body  in  or 
with  water,  were  not  immersions,  and  in  some  instances  they  were 
mere  sprinklings.  The  Pharisees  "  baptized  before  they  ate,"  but 
this  baptism  was  "  the  washing  of  hands,"  which  in  eastern  coun- 
tries is  done  by  servants  pouring  water  over  them,  and  not  by 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  405 

dipping  : — "  Here  is  Elisha,  the  son  of  Shaphat,  who  poured  water 
on  the  hands  of  Elijah,"  2  Kings  iii,  1 1  ;  that  is,  who  acted  as  his 
servant.  In  the  same  manner  the  feet  were  washed :  "  Thou 
gavest  me  no  water  upon,  s*i,  my  feet,"  Luke  vii,  44.  Again,  the 
Pharisees  are  said  to  have  held  the  "washing"  or  baptism  "of 
cups  and  pots,  brazen  vessels,  and  of  tables  ;"  not  certainly  for  the 
sake  of  cleanliness,  (for  all  people  hold  the  washing  or  baptism  of 
such  utensils  for  this  purpose,)  but  from  superstitious  notions  of  pu- 
rification. Now,  as  "  sprinkling"  is  prescribed  in  the  law  of  Moses, 
and  was  familiar  to  the  Jews,  as  the  mode  of  purification  from 
uncleanness,  as  in  the  case  of  the  sprinkling  of  the  water  of  sepa- 
ration, Num.  xix,  19,  it  is  for  this  reason  much  more  probable  that 
the  baptism  of  these  vessels  was  effected  by  sprinkling,  than  by 
either  pouring  or  immersion.  But  that  they  were  not  immersed, 
at  least  not  the  whole  of  them,  may  be  easily  made  to  appear ; 
and  if  "baptism"  as  to  any  of  these  utensils  does  not  signify 
immersion,  the  argument  from  the  use  of  the  word  must  be  aban- 
doned. Suppose  then,  the  pots,  cups,  and  brazen  vessels,  to  have 
been  baptized  by  immersion ;  the  "  beds"  or  couches  used  to 
recline  upon  at  their  meals,  which  they  ate  in  an  accumbent 
posture,  couches  which  were  constructed  for  three  or  five  persons 
each  to  lie  down  upon,  must  certainly  have  been  exempted  from 
the  operation  of  a  "  baptism"  by  dipping,  which  was  probably 
practised,  like  the  "  baptism"  of  their  hands,  before  every  meal. 
The  word  is  also  used  by  the  LXX,  in  Dan.  iv,  33,  where  Nebu- 
chadnezzar is  said  to  have  been  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven, 
which  was  plainly  effected,  not  by  his  immersion  in  dew,  but  by 
its  descent  upon  him.  Finally,  it  occurs  in  1  Cor.  x,  2,  "  And 
were  baptized  unto  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea ;"  where 
also  immersion  is  out  of  the  case.  The  Israelites  were  not 
immersed  in  the  sea,  for  they  went  through  it,  "  as  on  dry  land ;" 
and  they  were  not  immersed  in  the  cloud,  which  was  above  them. 
In  this  case,  if  the  spray  of  the  sea  is  referred  to,  or  the  descent  of 
rain  from  the  cloud,  they  were  baptized  by  sprinkling,  or  at  .most 
by  pouring ;  and  that  there  is  an  allusion  to  the  latter  circum- 
stance, is  made  almost  certain  by  a  passage  in  the  song  of  Deborah, 
and  other  expressions  in  the  Psalms,  which  speak  of  "  rain,"  and 
the  "  pouring  out  of  water,"  and  "  droppings"  from  the  "  cloud" 
which  directed  the  march  of  the  Jews  in  the  wilderness.  What- 
ever, therefore,  the  primary  meaning  of  the  verb  "  to  baptize"  may 
be,  is  a  question  of  no  importance  on  one  side  or  the  other.  Leav- 
ing the  mode  of  administering  baptism,  as  a  religious  rite,  out  of 
the  question,  it  is  used  generally,  at  least  in  the  New  Testament, 


406  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

not  to  express  immersion  in  water,  but  for  the  act  of  pouring  or 
sprinkling  it ;  and  that  baptism,  when  spoken  of  as  a  religious  rite, 
is  to  be  understood  as  administered  by  immersion,  no  satisfactory 
instance  can  be  adduced. 

The  baptism  of  John  is  the  first  instance  usually  adduced  in 
proof  of  this  practice  : — The  multitudes  who  went  out  to  him  were 
"baptized  of  him  in  Jordan;"  they  were  therefore  immersed. 

To  say  nothing  here  of  the  laborious,  and  apparently  impossible, 
task  imposed  upon  John,  of  plunging  the  multitudes,  who  flocked 
to  him  day  by  day,  into  the  river ;  and  the  indecency  of  the  whole 
proceeding  when  women  were  also  concerned ;  it  is  plain  that  the 
principal  object  of  the  Evangelist,  in  making  this  statement,  was 
to  point  out  the  place  where  John  exercised  his  ministry  and  bap- 
tized, and  not  to  describe  the  mode  ;  if  the  latter  is  at  all  referred 
to,  it  must  be  acknowledged  that  this  was  incidental  to  the  other 
design.  Now  it  so  happens,  that  we  have  a  passage  which  relates 
to  John's  baptism,  and  which  can  only  be  fairly  interpreted  by 
referring  to  his  mode  of  baptizing,  as  the  first  consideration  ; 
a  passage,  too,  which  John  himself  uttered  at  the  very  time  he  was 
baptizing  "  in  Jordan."  "  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water  unto 
repentance  ;  but  he  that  eometh  after  me  is  mightier  than  I :  he 
shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  Our  trans- 
lators, in  this  passage,  aware  of  the  absurdity  of  translating  the 
preposition  ev,  in,  have  properly  rendered  it  with;  but  the  advo- 
cates of  immersion  do  not  stumble  at  trifles,  and  boldly  rush  into 
the  absurdity  of  Campbell's  translation,  "  I  indeed  baptize  you  in 
water,  he  will  baptize  you  in  the  Holy  Ghost  and  fire."  Unfor- 
tunately for  this  translation,  we  have  not  only  the-  utter  senseless- 
ness of  the  phrases  baptized,  plunged  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  plunged 
in  fire,  to  set  against  it ;  but  also  the  very  history  of  the  completion 
of  this  prophetic  declaration,  and  that  not  only  as  to  the  fact  that 
Christ  did  indeed  baptize  his  disciples  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
with  fire,  but  also  as  to  the  mode  in  which  this  baptism  was  effect- 
ed :  "  And  there  appeared  unto  them  cloven  tongues  like  as  of  fire, 
and  it  sat  upon  each  of  them.  And  they  were  all  filled  with  the 
Holy  Ghost."  Thus  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  fire 
was  a  descent  upon,  and  not  an  immersion  into.  With  this  too 
agree  all  the  accounts  of  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit :  they  are 
all  from  above,  like  the  pouring  out  or  shedding  of  Avater  upon  the 
head ;  nor  is  there  any  expression  in  Scripture  which  bears  the 
most  remote  resemblance  to  immersing,  plunging  in  the  Holy 
Ghost.  When  our  Lord  received  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
"tbe  Spirit  of  God  descended  like  a  clove,  and  lighted  upon 


KOURTH.]  -theological  institutes.  407 

him."  When  Cornelius  and  his  family  received  the  same  gift, 
"  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  all  them  which  heard  the  word  ;"  "  and 
they  of  the  circumcision  that  believed  were  astonished,  because 
that  on  the  Gentiles  also  was  poured  out  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  which,  as  the  words  imply,  had  been  in  like  manner 
"poured  out  on  them."  The  common  phrase,  to  "receive"  the 
Holy  Ghost,  is  also  inconsistent  with  the  idea  of  being  immersed? 
plunged  into  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  finally,  when  St.  Paul  connects 
the  baptism  with  water,  and  the  baptism  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
together,  as  in  the  words  of  John  the  Baptist  just  quoted,  he 
expresses  the  mode  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  in  the  same  man- 
ner :  "  According  to  his  mercy  he  saved  us  by  the  washing  of 
regeneration,  and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  which  he  shed 
on  us  abundantly,  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour,"  Titus  iii, 
5,  6.  That  the  mode  therefore  in  which  John  baptized  was  by 
pouring  water  upon  his  disciples,  may  be  concluded  from  his  using" 
the  same  word  to  express  the  pouring  out,  the  descent,  of  the  Spirit 
upon  the  disciples  of  Jesus.  For  if  baptism  necessarily  means 
immersion,  and  John  baptized  by  immersion,  then  did  not  Jesus 
baptize  his  disciples  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  might  bestow  it 
upon  them,  but  he  did  not  baptize  them  with  it,  according  to  the 
Immersionists,  since  he  only  "poured  it  upon  them,"  "  shed  it  upon 
them,"  caused  it  "  to  fall  upon  them ;"  none  of  which,  according 
to  them,  is  baptism.  It  follows,  therefore,  that  the  prediction  of 
John  was  never  fulfilled,  because,  in  their  sense  of  baptizing,  none 
of  the  disciples  of  Jesus  mentioned  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ever 
received  the  Holy  Ghost  but  by  effusion.  This  is  the  dilemma  into 
which  they  put  themselves.  They  must  allow  that  baptism  is  not 
in  this  passage  used  for  immersion ;  or  they  must  deny  that  Jesus 
ever  did  baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 

To  baptize  "in  Jordan,"  does  not  then  signify  to  plunge  in  the 
river  of  Jordan.  John  made  the  neighbourhood  of  Jordan  the 
principal  place  of  his  ministry.  Either  at  the  fountains  of  some 
favoured  district,  or  at  some  river,  baptize  he  must  because  of  the 
multitudes  who  came  to  his  baptism,  in  a  country  deficient  in 
springs,  and  of  water  in  general ;  but  there  are  several  ways  of 
understanding  the  phrase  "in  Jordan,"  which  give  a  sufficiently 
good  sense,  and  involve  no  contradiction  to  the  words  of  John 
himself,  who  makes  his  baptism  an  effusion  of  water,  to  answer  to 
the  effusion  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  administered  by  Jesus.  It  may 
be  taken  as  a  note  of  place,  not  of  mode.  "  In  Jordan,"  therefore, 
the  expression  of  St.  Matthew  is,  in  St.  John,  "  in  Bethabara, 
beyond,"  or  situate  on,  "  Jordan,  where  John  was  baptizing  ;"  and 


408  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

this  seems  all  that  the  expression  was  intended  to  mark,  and  is 
the  sense  to  be  preferred.  It  is  thus  equivalent  to  "  at  Jordan," 
"at  Bethabara,  situate  on  Jordan;"  at  being  a  frequent  sense 
of  sv.  Or  it  may  signify  that  the  water  of  Jordan  was  made  use  of 
by  John  for  baptizing,  however  it  might  be  applied ;  for  we  should 
think  it  no  violent  mode  of  expression  to  say  that  we  washed  our- 
selves in  a  river,  although  we  should  mean,  not  that  Ave  plunged 
ourselves  into  it,  but  merely  that  we  took  up  the  water  in  our 
hands,  and  applied  it  in  the  way  of  effusion.  Or  it  may  be  taken  to 
express  his  baptizing  in  the  bed  of  the  river,  into  which  he  must 
have  descended  with  the  baptized,  in  order  to  take  up  the  water 
with  his  hand,  or  with  some  small  vessel,  as  represented  in  ancient 
has  reliefs,  to  pour  it  out  upon  them.  This  would  be  the  position 
of  any  baptizer  using  a  river  at  all  accessible  by  a  shelving  bank  ; 
and  when  within  the  bed  of  the  stream,  he  might  as  truly  be  said 
to  be  in  the  river,  when  mere  place  was  the  principal  thing  to  be 
pointed  out,  as  if  he  had  been  immersed  in  the  water.  The  Jordan 
in  this  respect  is  rather  remarkable,  having,  according  to  Maun- 
drell,  an  outermost  bank  formed  by  its  occasional  "swellings." 
The  remark  of  this  traveller  is,  "  After  having  descended  the  out- 
ermost bank,  you  go  a  furlong  upon  a  level  strand,  before  you 
come  to  the  immediate  bank  of  the  river."  Any  of  these  views  of 
the  import  of  the  phrases  "  in  Jordan,"  "  in  the  river  of  Jordan," 
used  plainly  with  intention  to  point  out  the  place  where  John 
exercised  his  ministry,  will  sufficiently  explain  them,  without 
involving  us  in  the  inextricable  difficulties  which  embarrass  the 
theory,  that  John  baptized  only  by  immersion.  To  go  indeed  to 
a  river  to  baptize,  would  in  such  countries  as  our  own,  where 
water  for  the  mere  purpose  of  effusion  may  readily  be  obtained 
out  of  cisterns,  pumps,  &c,  very  naturally  suggests  to  the  simple 
reader,  that  the  reason  for  John's  choice  of  a  river  was,  that  it 
afforded  the  means  of  immersion.  But  in  those  countries  the  case 
was  different.  Springs,  as  we  have  said,  were  scarce,  and  the 
water  for  domestic  purposes  had  to  be  fetched  daily  by  the  women 
in  pitchers  from  the  nearest  rivers  and  fountains,  which  rendered 
the  domestic  supply  scanty,  and  of  course  valuable.  But  even  if 
this  reason  did  not  exist,  baptism  in  rivers  would  not,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  imply  immersion.  Of  this  we  have  an  instance  in  the 
customs  of  the  people  of  Mesopotamia,  mentioned  in  the  Journal 
of  Wolfe,  the  Missionary.  This  sect  of  Christians  call  themselves 
"  the  followers  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  who  was  a  follower  of 
Christ."  Among  many  other  questions,  Mr.  Wolfe  inquired  of 
one  of  them  respecting  their  mode  of  baptism,  and  was  answered, 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  409 

"  The  Priests  or  Bishop  baptize  children  thirty  clays  old.  They 
take  the  child  to  the  banks  of  the  river ;  a  relative  or  friend  holds 
the  child  near  the  surface  of  the  water,  while  the  Priest  sprinkles 
the  element  upon  the  child,  and  with  prayers  they  name  the 
child."(2)  Mr.  Wolfe  asks,  "Why  do  they  baptize  in  rivers'?" 
Answer :  "  Because  St.  John  the  Baptist  baptized  in  the  river 
Jordan."  The  same  account  was  given  afterwards  by  one  of  their 
Bishops  or  High  Priests  :  "  They  carry  the  children  after  thirty 
days  to  the  river,  the  Priest  says  a  prayer,  the  godfather  takes 
the  child  to  the  river,  while  the  Priest  sprinkles  it  with  water." 
Thus  we  have  in  modern  times  river  baptism  without  immersion  ; 
and  among  the  Syrian  Christians,  though  immersion  is  used,  it 
does  not  take  place  till  after  the  true  baptismal  rite,  pouring  water 
upon  the  child  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  has  been  performed. 

The  second  proof  adduced  by  the  Immersionists  is  taken  from 
the  baptism  of  our  Lord,  who  is  said,  Matt,  iii,  16,  "to  have  gone 
up  straightway  out  of  the  water."  Here,  however,  the  preposition 
used  signifies  from,  and  avs/37]  ato  r*  vdaros,  is  simply  "  he  went  up 
from  the  water."  We  grant  that  this  might  have  been  properly  said 
in  whatever  way  the  baptism  had  been  previously  performed  ;  but 
then  it  certainly  in  itself  affords  no  argument  on  which  to  build  the 
notion  of  the  immersion  of  our  Saviour. 

The  great  passage  of  the  Immersionists,  however,  is  Acts  viii, 
38,  39  :  "  And  they  went  down  both  into  the  water,  both  Philip 
ind  the  Eunuch,  and  he  baptized  him  ;  and  when  they  were  come 
up  out  of  the  water,"  &c.  This  is  relied  upon  as  a  decisive  proof 
of  the  immersion  and  emersion  of  the  Eunuch.  If  so,  however,  it 
proves  too  much ;  for  nothing  is  said  of  the  Eunuch  which  is  not 
said  of  Philip,  "  They  went  down  both  into  the  water," — "and 
when  they  were  come  up  out  of  the  water ;" — and  so  Philip  must 
have  immersed  himself  as  well  as  the  Eunuch.  Nor  will  the  pre- 
positions determine  the  case  ;  they  would  have  been  employed 
properly  had  Philip  and  the  Eunuch  gone  into  the  water  by  partial 
or  by  entire  immersion,  and  therefore  come  out  of  it  on  dry  land  ; 
and  with  equal  propriety,  and  according  to  the  habitual  use  of  the 
same  prepositions  by  Greek  writers,  they  would  express  going  to 
the  water,  without  going  into  it,  and  returning  from  it,  and  not  out 
of  it,  for  sis  is  spoken  of  place,  and  properly  signifies  at,  or  it  indi- 
cates motion  towards  a  certain  limit,  and,  for  any  thing  that  appears 
to  the  contrary  in  the  history  of  the  Eunuch's  baptism,  that  limit 
may  just  as  well  be  placed  at  the  nearest  verge  of  the  water  as  in 

(2)  Journal,  vol.  ii,  p.  311. 

Vol.  III.  43 


410  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

the  middle  of  it.  Thus  the  LXX  say,  Isa.  xxvi,  2,  "  The  King  sent 
Rabshakeh  from  Lachish,  as,  to  Jerusalem,"  certainly  not  into  it, 
for  the  city  was  not  captured.  The  sons  of  the  Prophets  "  came, 
W,  to  Jordan  to  cut  wood,"  2  Kings  vi,  4.  They  did  not,  we  sup- 
pose, go  into  the  water  to  perform  that  work.  Peter  was  bid  to 
"  go,  z>s,  to  the  sea,  and  cast  a  hook,"  not  surely  to  go  into  the  sea  ; 
and  our  Lord,  Matt,  v,  1,  rtwent  up,  s«s,  to  a  mountain,"  but  not 
into  it.  The  corresponding  preposition  *x,  which  signifies,  when 
used  of  place,  from,  out  of,  must  be  measured  by  the  meaning  of  s»s« 
When  sis  means  into,  then  s*  means  out  of;  but  when  it  means 
simply  to,  then  sx  can  express  no  more  than  from.  Thus  this 
passage  is  nothing  to  the  purpose  of  the  Immersionists. 

The  next  proof  relied  upon  in  favour  of  immersion,  is  John 
iii,  22,  23  :  "  After  these  things  came  Jesus  and  his  disciples  into 
the  land  of  Judea,  and  there  he  tamed  with  them  and  baptized  ; 
and  John  also  was  baptizing  in  iEnon,  near  to  Salim,  because 
there  was  much  water  there,  and  they  came  and  were  baptized." 
The  Immersionists  can  see  no  reason  for  either  Jesus  or  John 
baptizing  where  there  was  much  water,  but  that  they  plunged  their 
converts.  The  true  reason  for  this  has  however  been  already 
given.  Where  could  the  multitudes  who  came  for  baptism  be 
assembled]  Clearly,  not  in  houses.  The  preaching  was  in  the 
fields ;  and  since  the  rite  which  was  to  follow  a  ministry  which 
made  such  an  impression,  and  drew  together  such  crowds,  was 
baptism,  the  necessity  of  the  case  must  lead  the  Baptist  to  Jordan, 
or  to  some  other  district,  where,  if  a  river  was  wanting,  fountains 
at  least  existed.  The  necessity  was  equal  in  this  case,  whether 
the  mode  of  baptism  were  that  of  aspersion,  of  pouring,  or  of 
immersion. 

The  Baptists,  however,  have  magnified  iEnon,  which  signifies 
ike  fountain  of  On,  into  a  place  of  "  many  and  great  waters." 
Unfortunately,  however,  no  such  powerful  fountain,  sending  out 
many  streams  of  water  fit  for  plunging  multitudes  into,  has  ever 
been  found  by  travellers,  although  the  country  has  been  often 
visited ;  and  certainly  if  its  streams  had  been  of  the  copious  and 
remarkable  character  assigned  to  them,  they  could  not  have 
vanished.  It  rather  appears,  however,  that  the  "  much  water," 
or  "many  waters,"  in  the  text,  refers  rather  to  the  whole  tract 
of  country,  than  to  the  fountain  of  On  itself;  because  it  appears 
to  be  given  by  the  Evangelist  as  the  reason  why  Jesus  and  his 
disciples  came  into  the  same  neighbourhood  to  baptize.  Different 
baptisms  were  administered,  and  therefore  in  different  places.  The 
baptism  administered  by  Jesus  at  this  time  was  one  of  multitudes  ; 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  411 

this  appears  from  the  remark  of  one  of  John's  disciples  to  his 
Master,  "  He  that  was  with  thee  beyond  Jordan,  to  whom  thou 
barest  witness,  behold,  the  same  baptizeth,  and  all  men  come  to 
him."  The  place  or  places  too,  where  Jesus  baptized,  although  in 
the  same  district,  could  not  be  very  near,  since  John's  disciple 
mentions  the  multitudes  who  came  to  be  baptized  by  Jesus,  or 
rather  by  his  disciples,  as  a  piece  of  information ;  and  thus  we 
rind  a  reason  for  the  mention  of  the  much  water,  or  many  waters,, 
with  reference  to  the  district  of  country  itself,  and  not  to  the  single 
fountain  of  On.  The  tract  had  probably  many  fountains  in  it, 
which,  as  being  a  peculiarity  in  a  country  not  generally  so  distin- 
guished, would  lead  to  the  use  of  the  expression,  "  much  water," 
although  not  one  of  these  fountains  or  wells  might  be  sufficient  to 
allow  of  the  plunging  of  numbers  of  people,  and  probably  was  not. 
Indeed  if  the  disciples  of  Jesus  baptized  by  immersion,  the  Immer- 
sionists  are  much  more  concerned  to  discover  "  much  water," 
"many  waters,"  "large  and  deep  streams,"  somewhere  else  in  the 
district  than  at  iEnon  ;  because  it  is  plain  from  the  narrative,  that 
the  number  of  candidates  for  John's  baptism  had  greatly  fallen  off 
at  that  time,  and  that  the  people  now  generally  flocked  to  Christ. 
Hence  the  remark  of  John,  verse  30,  when  his  disciples  had 
informed  him  that  Jesus  was  baptizing  in  the  neighbourhood,  and 
that  "  all  men  came  to  him, — "  He  must  increase,  I  must  decrease." 
Hence  also  the  observation  of  the  Evangelist  in  the  first  verse  of 
the  next  chapter,  "  The  Pharisees  had  heard  that  Jesus  made  and. 
baptized  more  disciples  than  John." 

As  these  instances  all  so  plainly  fail  to  serve  the  cause  of  immer- 
sion, we  need  not  dwell  upon  the  others.  The  improbability  of 
three  thousand  persons  being  immersed  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
has  been  already  mentioned.  The  baptism  of  Saul,  of  Lydia,  of 
the  Philippian  jailer,  and  of  the  family  of  Cornelius,  are  all  instances 
of  house  baptism,  and,  for  that  reason,  are  still  less  likely  to  have 
been  by  plunging.  The  Immersionists,  indeed,  invent  "  tanks,"  or 
"  baths,"  for  this  purpose,  in  all  these  houses  ;  but,  as  nothing  of 
the  kind  appears  on  the  face  of  the  history,  or  is  even  incidentally 
suggested,  suppositions  prove  nothing. 

Thus  all  the  presumptions  before  mentioned,  against  the  prac- 
tice of  immersion,  lie  full  against  it,  without  any  relief  from  the 
Scriptures  themselves.  Not  one  instance  can  be  shown  of  that 
practice  from  the  New  Testament ;  whilst,  so  far  as  baptism  was 
emblematical  of  the  pouring  out  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  doctrine 
of  immersion  wholly  destroys  its  significance*.  In  fact,  if  the  true 
mode  of  baptism  be  immersion  only,  then  must  we  wholly  give  up 


412  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

the  phrase,  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  in  any  other  mode 
than  that  of  pouring  out  was  never  administered. 

The  only  argument  left  for  the  advocates  of  immersion  is  the 
supposed  allusion  to  the  mode  of  baptism  contained  in  the  words 
of  St.  Paul,  Rom.  vi,  3,  4 :  "  Know  ye  not  that  so  many  of  us  as 
were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized  into  his  death  ? 
Therefore  we  are  buried  with  him  by  baptism,  into  death  ;  that,  like 
as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father, 
even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life."  It  is  necessary, 
however,  to  quote  the  next  verses  also,  which  are  dependent  upon 
the  foregoing,  "For  if  we  have  been  planted  together,"  still  by 
baptism,  "in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall  be  also  in  the  like- 
ness of  his  resurrection ;  knowing  this,  that  our  old  man  is  cru- 
cified with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  .might  be  destroyed,  that 
henceforth  we  should  not  serve  sin.  For  he  that  is  dead  is  freed 
from  sin,"  v,  5-7.  Why  then  do  not  the  advocates  of  immersion 
go  forward  to  these  verses,  so  inseparably  connected  with  those 
they  are  so  ready  to  quote,  and  show  us  a  resemblance,  not  only 
between  baptism  by  immersion,  and  being  buried  with  Christ ;  but 
also  between  immersion,  and  being  "  planted  with  Christ  1"  If  the 
allusion  of  the  Apostle  is  to  the  planting  of  a  young  tree  in  the. 
earth,  there  is  clearly  but  a  very  partial,  not  a  total  immersion  in 
the  case ;  and  if  it  be  to  grafting  a  branch  upon  a  tree,  the 
resemblance  is  still  more  imperfect.  Still  further,  as  the  Apostle 
in  the  same  connexion  speaks  of  our  being  "crucified  with 
Christ,"  and  that  also  by  baptism,  why  do  they  not  show  us  how 
immersion  in  water  resembles  the  nailing  of  a  body  to  a  cross  ? 

But  this  striking  and  important  text  is  not  to  be  explained  by  a 
fancied  resemblance  between  a  burial,  as  they  choose  to  call  it,  of 
the  body  in  water,  and  the  burial  of  Christ ;  as  if  a  dip  or  a  plunge 
could  have  any  resemblance  to  that  separation  from  the  living,  and 
that  laying  aside  of  a  body  in  the  sepulchre,  which  burial  implies. 
This  forced  thought  darkens  and  enervates  the  whole  passage, 
instead  of  bringing  forth  its  powerful  sentiments  into  clearer  view. 
The  manifest  object  of  the  Apostle  in  the  whole  of  this  part  of  his 
Epistle,  was  to  show,  that  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith 
aione,  which  he  had  just  been  establishing,  could  not  in  any  true 
believer  lead  to  licentiousness  of  life.  "  What  then  shall  we  say  1 
Shall  we  continue  in  sin  that  grace  may  abound  1  God  forbid  \ 
How  shall  we  that  are  dead  to  sin,  live  any  longer  therein  ?"  The 
reason  then  which  is  given  by  the  Apostle  why  true  believers  can- 
not continue  in  sin,  is,  that  they  are  "  dead  to  sin,"  which  is  his 
answer  to  the  objection.     Now,  this  mystical  death  to  sin  he  pro* 


FOURTH.  J  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  413 

ceeds  to  attribute  to  the  instrumentality  of  baptism,  taking  it 
to  be  an  act  of  that  faith  in  Christ  of  which  it  was  the  external 
expression ;  and  then  he  immediately  runs  into  a  favourite  com- 
parison, which  under  various  forms  occurs  in  his  writings,  some- 
times accompanied  with  the  same  allusion  to  baptism,  and  sometimes 
referring  only  to  "  faith"  as  the  instrument, — a  comparison  between 
the  mystical  death,  burial,  and  resurrection  of  believers,  and  the 
death,  burial,  and  resurrection  of  Christ.     This  is  the  comparison 
of  the  text ;  not  a  comparison  between  our  mystical  death,  and 
baptism  ;  nor  between  baptism,  and  the  death  and  burial  of  Christ ; 
either  of  which  lay  wide  of  the  Apostle's  intention.    Baptism,  as  an 
act  of  faith,  is,  in  fact,  expressly  made,  not  a  figure  of  the  effects 
which  follow,  as  stated  in  the  text,  but  the  means  of  effecting  them. 
"  Know  ye  not  that  so  many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus 
Christ,  were  baptized  into  his  death ;"  we  enter  by  this  means  into 
the  experience  of  its  efficacy  in  effecting  a  mystical  death  in  us ; 
in  other  words,  we  die  with  him,  or,  as  it  is  expressed  in  verse  6, 
"  Our  old  man  is  crucified  with  him."    Still  further,  "  by  baptism," 
Ski  ts  (3a.irri(fiiuros,  through,  or  by  means  of,  baptism,  "we  are  buried 
with  him  ;"  we  not  only  die  to  sin  and  the  world,  but  we  are  sepa- 
rated wholly  from  it,  as  the  body  of  Christ  was  separated  from  the 
living  world,  when  laid  in  the  sepulchre  ;  the  connexion  between 
sin  and  the  world  and  us  is  completely  broken  ;  and  those  who  are 
buried  and  put  out  of  sight  are  no  longer  reckoned  among  men ; 
nay,  as  the  slave  (for  the  Apostle  brings  in  this  figure  also)  is  by 
death  and  burial  wholly  put  out  of  the  power  of  his  former  master, 
so,  "  that  we  should  not  serve  sin  ;  for  he  that  is  dead  is  freed  from 
sin."    But  we  also  mystically  rise  with  him  ;  "that  like  as  Christ 
was  raised  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even  so  we 
also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life,"  having  new  connexions, 
new  habits,  new  enjoyments,  and  new  hopes.    We  have  a  similar 
passage  in  Col.  ii,  12,  and  it  has  a  similar  interpretation  :  "Buried 
with  him  in  baptism,  wherein  also  ye  are  risen  with  him,  through 
the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God,  who  hath  raised  him  from  the 
dead."    In  the  preceding  verse  the  Apostle  had  been  speaking  of 
the  mystical  death  of  Christians,  under  the  phrase,  "putting  off 
the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh ;"  then,  as  in  his  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  he  adds  our  mystical  burial  with  Christ,  which  is  a 
heightened  representation  of  death  ;  and  then  also,  our  rising 
again  with  Christ.     Here  too  all  these  three  effects  are  attributed 
to  baptism  as  the  means.    We  put  off  the  body  of  sins  "  by  the 
circumcision  of  Christ,"  that  is,  as  we  have  seen,  by  Christian 
circumcision  or  baptism ;  we  are  buried  with  him  bv  baptism ; 

43* 


414  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

jv  being  obviously  used  here,  like  6ut,  to  denote  the  instrument ; 
and  by  baptism  we  rise  with  him  into  a  new  life. 

Now,  to  institute  a  comparison  between  a  mode  of  baptism  and 
the  burial  of  Christ,  wholly  destroys  the  meaning  of  the  passage  ; 
for  how  can  the  Apostle  speak  of  baptism  as  an  emblem  of  Christ's 
burial,  when  he  argues  from  it  as  the  instrument  of  our  death  unto 
sin,  and  separation  from  it  by  a  mystical  burial  ?  Nor  is  baptism 
here  made  use  of  as  the  emblem  of  our  own  spiritual  death,  burial, 
and  resurrection.  As  an  emblem,  even  immersion,  though  it 
might  put  forth  a  clumsy  type  of  burial  and  rising  again,  is  want- 
ing in  not  being  emblematical  of  death  ;  and  yet  all  three,  our 
mystical  death,  burial,  and  rising  again,  are  distinctly  spoken  of, 
and  must  all  be  found  represented  in  some  type.  But  the  type 
made  use  of  by  the  Apostle  is  manifestly  not  baptism,  but  the 
death,  the  burial,  and  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord  ;  and  in  this 
view  he  pursues  this  bold  and  impressive  figure  to  even  the  verge 
of  allegory,  in  the  succeeding  verses :  "  For  he  that  is  dead  is 
freed  from  sin.  Now  if  we  be  dead  with  Christ,  we  believe  that 
we  shall  also  live  with  him :  Knowing  that  Christ  being  raised 
from  the  dead  dieth  no  more  ;  death  hath  no  more  dominion  over 
him.  For  in  that  he  died,  he  died  unto  sin  once  ;  but  in  that  he 
liveth,  he  liveth  unto  God ;  likewise  reckon  ye  also  yourselves 
to  be  dead  indeed  unto  sin,  but  alive  unto  God  through  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord." 

In  the  absence  therefore  of  all  proof,  that,  in  any  instance  found 
in  the  New  Testament,  baptism  was  administered  by  immersion ; 
with  so  many  presumptions  against  that  indecent  practice  as  have 
been  stated  ;  with  the  decisive  evidence  also  of  a  designed  corres- 
pondence between  the  baptism,  the- pouring  out,  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  the  baptism,  the  pouring  out,  of  water  ;  we  may  conclude, 
with  confidence,  that  the  latter  was  the  Apostolic  mode  of  admi- 
nistering that  ordinance  ;  and  that  first  washing,  and  then  immer- 
sion, were  introduced  later,  towards  the  latter  end  of  the  second 
century,  along  with  several  other  superstitious  additions  to  this 
important  sacrament,  originating  in  that  "  will-worship"  which, 
presumed  to  destroy  the  simplicity  of  God's  ordinances,  under 
pretence  of  (3)  rendering  them  more  emblematical  and  impressive. 

(3)  Baptism,  as  an  emblem,  points  out,  1.  The  washing  away  of  the  guilt  and  pol- 
lution of  sin.  2.  The  pouring  out  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  Scripture  it  is  made  an 
emblem  of  these  two,  and  of  these  only.  Some  of  the  superstitions  above  alluded  to 
sin  therefore  by  excess;  but  immersion  sins  by  defect.  It  retains  the  emblematical 
character  of  the  rite  as  to  the  washing  away  of  sin ;  but  it  loses  it  entirely  as  to  the 
&ft  °f  the  Holy  Ghost;  and,  beyond  the  washing  away  of  sin,  is  an  emblem  ci 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  415 

Even  if  immersion  had  been  the  original  mode  of  baptizing-,  we 
should,  in  the  absence  of  any  command  on  the  subject,  direct  or 
implied,  have  thought  the  Church  at  liberty  to  accommodate  the 
manner  of  applying  water  to  the  body  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity, 
in  which  the  essence  of  the  rite  consists,  to  different  climates  and 
manners ;  but  it  is  satisfactory  to  discover  that  all  the  attempts 
made  to  impose  upon  Christians  a  practice  repulsive  to  the  feel- 
ings, dangerous  to  the  health,  and  offensive  to  delicacy,  is  destitute 
of  all  scriptural  authority,  and  of  really  primitive  practice. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

The  Institutions  of  the  Church. — The  Lord's  Supper. 

The  agreement  and  difference  between  baptism  and  the  Lord's 
►Supper  are  well  stated  by  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  its  Cate- 
chism :  "  The  sacraments  of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper 
agree,  in  that  the  author  of  both  is  God  ;  the  spiritual  part  of 
both  is  Christ  and  his  benefits ;  both  are  seals  of  the  same  cove- 
nant ;  to  be  dispensed  by  Ministers  of  the  Gospel,  and  none 
other ;  and  to  be  continued  in  the  Church  of  Christ  until  his 
second  coming."  "  These  sacraments  differ,  in  that  baptism  is  to 
be  administered  but  once  with  water, — and  that  even  to  infants ; 
whereas  the  Lord's  Supper  is  to  be  administered  often,  in  the 
elements  of  bread  and  wine,  to  represent  and  exhibit  Christ  as 
spiritual  nourishment  to  the  soul,  and  to  confirm  our  continuance 
and  growth  in  him,  and  that  only  to  such  as  are  of  years  and 
ability  to  examine  themselves." 

As  baptism  was  substituted  for  circumcision,  so  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per was  put  by  our  Saviour  in  the  place  of  the  Passover ;  and 
was  instituted  immediately  after  celebrating  that  ordinance  for  the 
last  time  with  his  disciples.  The  Passover  was  an  eminent  type 
of  our  Lord's  sacrifice  and  of  its  benefits  ;  and  since  he  was  about 
to  fulfil  that  symbolical  rite  which  from  age  to  age  had  continued 
to  exhibit  it  to  the  faith  and  hope  of  ancient  saints,  it  could  have 


nothing  fur  which  we  have  any  scriptural  authority  to  make  it  emblematical. 
Immersion,  therefore,  as  distinct  from  every  other  mode  of  applying  water  to  the 
body,  means  nothing.  To  say  that  it  figures  our  spiritual  death  and  resurrection, 
has,  we  have  seen,  no  authority  from  the  texts  used  to  prove  it ;  and  to  make  a  sud- 
den pop  under  water  to  be  emblematical  of  burial,  is  as  far-fetched  a  conceit  as  any 
which  adorns  the  Emblems  of  Quarks,  without  any  portion  of  the  ingenuity. 


416  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

no  place  under  the  new  dispensation.  Christ  in  person  became 
the  true  Passover ;  and  a  new  rite  was  necessary  to  commemorate 
the  spiritual  deliverance  of  men,  and  to  convey  and  confirm  its- 
benefits.  The  circumstances  of  its  institution  are  explanatory  of 
its  nature  and  design. 

On  the  night  when  the  first-born  of  Egypt  were  slain,  the 
children  of  Israel  were  commanded  to  take  a  lamb  for  every 
house,  to  kill  it,  and  to  sprinkle  the  blood  upon  the  posts  of  their 
doors,  so  that  the  destroying  angel  might  pass  over  the  houses  of 
all  who  had  attended  to  this  injunction.  Not  only  were  the  first- 
born children  thus  preserved  alive,  but  the  effect  was  the  deliver- 
ance of  the  whole  nation  from  their  bondage  in  Egypt,  and  their 
becoming  the  visible  Church  and  people  of  God  by  virtue  of  a 
special  covenant.  In  commemoration  of  these  events,  the  feast  of 
the  Passover  was  made  annual,  and  at  that  time  all  the  males  of 
Judea  assembled  before  the  Lord  in  Jerusalem ;  a  lamb  was  pro- 
vided for  every  house ;  the  blood  was  poured  under  the  altar  by 
the  Priests,  and  the  lamb  was  eaten  by  the  people  in  their  tents 
or  houses.  At  this  domestic  and  religious  feast,  every  master  of  a 
family  took  the  cup  of  thanksgiving,  and  gave  thanks  with  his 
family  to  the  God  of  Israel.  As  soon,  therefore,  as  our  Lord, 
acting  as  the  master  of  his  family,  the  disciples,  had  finished  this 
the  usual  paschal  ceremony,  he  proceeded  to  a  new  and  distinct 
action :  "  He  took  bread,"  the  bread  then  on  the  table,  "  and 
gave  thanks,  and  brake  it,  and  gave  it  to  them,  saying,  This  is 
my  body  which  is  given  for  you ;  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me. 
Likewise  also  the  cup  after  supper,"  the  cup  with  the  wine  which 
had  been  used  in  the  paschal  supper,  "saying,  This  cup  is  the 
New  Testament  in  my  blood,  which  is  shed  for  you ;"  or,  as  it  is 
expressed  by  St.  Matthew,  "  and  he  took  the  cup,  and  gave 
thanks,  and  gave  it  to  them,  saying,  Drink  ye  all  of  it ;  for  this  is 
my  blood  of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  shed  for  many  for  the 
remission  of  sins." 

That  this  was  the  institution  of  a  standing  rite,  and  not  a  tempo- 
rary action  to  be  confined  to  the  disciples  then  present  with  him, 
is  made  certain  from  1  Cor.  xi,  23-26 :  "  For  I  have  received  of 
the  Lord  that  which  also  I  delivered  to  you,  that  the  Lord  Jesus, 
the  same  night  in  which  he  was  betrayed,  took  bread,  and  when 
he  had  given  thanks  he  brake  it,  and  said,  Take,  eat,  this  is  my 
body,  which  is  broken  for  you ;  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me. 
After  the  same  manner  also  he  took  the  cup,  when  he  had  supped, 
saying,  This  cup  is  the  New  Testament  in  my  blood ;  this  do  ye, 
as  oft  as  ye  drink  it,  in  remembrance  of  me.     For  as  often  as  ye 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  417 

eat  this  bread,  and  drink  this  cup,  ye  do  show  the  Lord's  death 
till  he  come."  From  these  words  we  learn,  1.  That  St.  Paul 
received  a  special  revelation  as  to  this  ordinance,  which  must 
have  had  a  higher  object  than  the  mere  commemoration  of  an 
historical  fact,  and  must  be  supposed  to  have  been  made  for  the 
purpose  of  enjoining  it  upon  him  to  establish  this  rite  in  the 
Churches  raised  up  by  him,  and  of  enabling  him  rightly  to  under- 
stand its  authority  and  purport,  where  he  found  it  already  appointed 
by  the  first  founders  of  the  first  Churches.  2.  That  the  command 
of  Christ,  "  This  do  in  remembrance  of  me,"  which  was  originally 
given  to  the  disciples  present  with  Christ  at  the  last  Passover,  is 
laid  by  St.  Paul  upon  the  Corinthians.  3.  That  he  regarded  the 
Lord's  Supper  as  a  rite  to  be  "  often"  celebrated,  and  that  in  all 
future  time  until  the  Lord  himself  should  °  come"  to  judge  the 
world.  The  perpetual  obligation  of  this  ordinance  cannot  there- 
fore be  reasonably  disputed. 

Of  the  nature  of  this  great  and  affecting  rite  of  Christianity, 
different  and  very  opposite  opinions  have  been  formed,  arising 
partly  from  the  elliptical  and  figurative  modes  of  expression 
adopted  by  Christ  at  its  institution  ;  but  more  especially  from 
the  influence  of  superstition  upon  some,  and  the  extreme  of 
affected  rationalism  upon  others. 

The  first  is  the  monstrous  theory  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  as 
contradictory  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  whose  words  it  professes  to 
receive  in  their  literal  meaning,  as  it  is  revolting  to  the  senses  and 
reason  of  mankind. 

"  It  is  conceived  that  the  words,  '  This  is  my  body ;  This  is  my 
blood,'  are  to  be  understood  in  their  most  literal  sense  ;  that  when 
Jesus  pronounced  these  words,  he  changed,  by  his  almighty  power, 
the  bread  upon  the  table  into  his  body,  and  the  wine  into  his 
blood,  and  really  delivered  his  body  and  blood  into  the  hands  of 
his  Apostles ;  and  that  at  all  times  when  the  Lord's  Supper  is 
administered,  the  Priest,  by  pronouncing  these  words  with  a  good 
intention,  has  the  power  of  making  a  similar  change.  This  change 
is  known  by  the  name  of  transubstantiation  ;  the  propriety  of  which 
name  is  conceived  to  consist  in  this,  that  although  the  bread  and 
wine  are  not  changed  in  figure,  taste,  weight,  or  any  other  acci- 
dent, it  is  believed  that  the  substance  of  them  is  completely 
destroyed ;  that  in  place  of  it,  the  substance  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  although  clothed  with  all  the  sensible  properties 
of  bread  and  wine,  is  truly  present ;  and  that  the  persons  who 
receive  what  has  been  consecrated  by  pronouncing  these  words, 
do  not  receive  bread  and  wine,  but  literally  partake  of  the  body 


418  THEOLOGICAL  INSTITUTES.  [PART 

and  blood  of  Christ,  and  really  eat  his  flesh,  and  drink  his  blood. 
It  is  further  conceived,  that  the  bread  and  wine  thus  changed,  are 
presented  by  the  Priest  to  God;  and  he  receives  the  name  of 
Priest,  because  in  laying  them  upon  the  altar  he  offers  to  God  a 
sacrifice,  which,  although  it  be  distinguished  from  all  others  by 
being  without  the  shedding  of  blood,  is  a  true  propitiatory  sacrifice 
for  the  sins  of  the  dead  and  of  the  living, — the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  which  were  presented  on  the  cross,  again  presented  in  the 
sacrifice  of  the  mass.  It  is  conceived,  that  the  materials  of  this 
sacrifice,  being  truly  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  possess  an 
intrinsic  virtue,  which  does  not  depend  upon  the  disposition  of  him 
who  receives  them,  but  operates  immediately  upon  all  who  do  not 
obstruct  the  operation  by  a  mortal  sin.  Hence  it  is  accounted  of 
great  importance  for  the  salvation  of  the  sick  and  dying,  that  parts 
of  these  materials  should  be  sent  to  them ;  and  it  is  understood 
that  the  practice  of  partaking  in  private  of  a  small  portion  of  what 
the  Priest  has  thus  transubstantiated,  is,  in  all  respects,  as  proper 
and  salutary  as  joining  with  others  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  It  is  fur- 
ther conceived,  that  as  the  bread  and  wine,  when  converted  into  the 
[body  and]  blood  of  Christ,  are  a  natural  object  of  reverence  and 
adoration  to  Christians,  it  is  highly  proper  to  worship  them  upon 
the  altar  \  and  that  it  is  expedient  to  carry  them  about  in  solemn 
procession,  that  they  may  receive  the  homage  of  all  who  meet 
them.  What  had  been  transubstantiated  was  therefore  lifted  up 
for  the  purpose  of  receiving  adoration,  both  when  it  was  shown  to 
the  people  at  the  altar,  and  when  it  was  carried  about.  Hence 
arose  that  expression  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  the  elevation  of  the 
host,  elevatio  hostice.  But,  as  the  wine  in  being  carried  about  was 
exposed  to  accidents  inconsistent  with  the  veneration  due  to  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ,  it  became  customary  to  send  only  the 
bread ;  and,  in  order  to  satisfy  those  who  for  this  reason  did  not 
receive  the  wine,  they  were  taught  that,  as  the  bread  was  changed 
into  the  body  of  Christ,  they  partook  by  concomitancy  of  the , 
blood  with  the  body.  In  process  of  time,  the  people  were  not 
allowed  to  partake  of  the  cup ;  and  it  was  said,  that,  when  Jesus 
spake  these  words,  '  Drink  ye  all  of  it,'  he  was  addressing  himself 
only  to  his  Apostles,  so  that  his  command  was  fulfilled  when  the 
Priests,  the  successors  of  the  Apostles,  drank  of  the  cup,  although 
the  people  were  excluded.  And  thus  the  last  part  of  this  system 
conspired  with  the  first  in  exalting  the  Clergy  very  far  above  the 
laity.  For  the  same  persons  who  had  the  power  of  changing  bread 
and  wine  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  who  presented 
what  they  had  thus  made,  as  a  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  others. 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  419 

enjoyed  the  partaking  of  the  cup,  while  communion  in  one  kind 
only  was  permitted  to  the  people." (4) 

So  violently  are  these  notions  opposed  to  the  common  sense  of 
mankind,  that  the  ground  to  which  the  Romish  writers  have 
always  been  driven  in  their  defence,  is  the  authority  of  their 
Church,  and  the  necessity  of  implicit  faith  in  its  interpretations 
of  Scripture  ;  principles  which  shut  out  the  use  of  Scripture 
entirely,  and  open  the  door  to  every  heresy  and  fanatical  folly. 
But  for  the  ignorance  and  superstition  of  Europe  during  the 
middle  ages,  this  monstrous  perversion  of  a  sacred  rite  could 
not  have  been  effected,  and  even  then  it  was  not  established  as 
an  article  of  faith  without  many  struggles.  Almost  all  writers 
on  the  Protestant  controversy  will  furnish  a  sufficient  confutation 
of  this  capital  attempt  to  impose  upon  the  credulity  of  mankind ; 
and  to  them,  should  it  need  any  refutation,  the  reader  may  be 
referred. 

The  mind  of  Luther,  so  powerful  to  throw  off  dogmas  which  had 
nothing  but  human  authority  to  support  them,  was,  as  to  the  sacra- 
ment, held  in  the  bonds  of  early  association.  He  concluded  that 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  really  present  in  the  Lord's  Supper ; 
but,  aware  of  the  absurdities  and  self-contradictions  of  transubstan- 
tiation,  he  laid  hold  of  a  doctrine  which  some  writers,  in  the  Romish 
Church  itself,  had  continued  to  prefer  to  the  papal  dogma  above 
stated.  This  was  designated  by  the  term  consubstantiation,  which 
allows  that  the  bread  and  wine  remain  the  same  after  consecration 
as  before.  Thus  he  escapes  the  absurdity  of  contradicting  the  very 
senses  of  men.  It  was  held,  however,  by  Luther,  that  though  the 
bread  and  wine  remain  unchanged,  yet  that,  together  with  them,  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  literally  received  by  the  communicants. 
Some  of  his  immediate  followers  did  not,  however,  admit  more  on 
this  point,  than  that  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  were  really  pre- 
sent in  the  sacrament ;  but  that  the  manner  of  that  presence  was 
an  inexplicable  mystery.  Yet,  in  some  important  respects,  Luther 
and  the  Consubstantialists  wholly  escaped  the  errors  of  the  Church 
of  Rome  as  to  this  sacrament.  They  denied  that  it  was  a  sacrifice  ; 
and  that  the  presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  gave  to  it  any 
physical  virtue  acting  independently  of  the  disposition  of  the  re- 
ceiver ;  and  that  it  rendered  the  elements  the  objects  of  adoration. 
Their  error,  therefore,  may  be  considered  rather  of  a  speculative 
than  of  a  practical  nature  ;  and  was  adopted  probably  in  deference 
to  what  was  conceived  to  be  the  literal  meaning  of  the  words  of 
Christ  when  the  Lord's  Supper  was  instituted. 

(4)  Bishop  Tomlinb  On  the  Articles. 


420  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

A  third  view  was  held  by  some  of  Luther's  contemporaries,  which 
has  been  thus  described  :  "  Carolostadt,  a  professor  with  Luther  in 
the  University  of  Wittenberg,  and  Zuinglius,  a  native  of  Switzerland, 
the  founder  of  the  Reformed  Churches,  or  those  Protestant  Churches 
which  are  not  Lutheran,  taught  that  the  bread  and  wine  in  the  Lord's 
Supper  are  the  signs  of  the  absent  body  and  blood  of  Christ ;  that 
when  Jesus  said,  '  This  is  my  body,  This  is  my  blood,'  he  used  a 
figure  exactly  of  the  same  kind  with  that,  by  which,  according  to 
the  abbreviations  continually  practised  in  ordinary  speech,  the  sign 
is  often  put  for  the  thing  signified.  As  this  figure  is  common,  so 
there  were  two  circumstances  which  would  prevent  the  Apostles 
from  misunderstanding  it,  when  used  in  the  institution  of  the  Lord's 
Supper.  The  one  was,  that  they  saw  the  body  of  Jesus  then  alive, 
and  therefore  could  not  suppose  that  they  were  eating  it.  The  other 
was,  that  they  had  just  been  partaking  of  a  Jewish  festival,  in  the 
institution  of  which  the  very  same  figure  had  been  used.  For  in 
the  night  in  which  the  children  of  Israel- escaped  out  of  Egypt,  God 
said  of  the  lamb  which  he  commanded  every  house  to  eat  and  slay, 
'  It  is  the  Lord's  passover  ;'(5)  not  meaning  that  it  was  the  action 
of  the  Lord  passing  over  eveiw  house,  but  the  token  and  pledge  of 
that  action.  It  is  admitted  by  all  Christians,  that  there  is  such  a 
figure  used  in  one  part  of  the  institution.  When  our  Lord  says, 
{  This  cup  is  the  new  covenant  in  my  blood,'  none  suppose  him  to 
mean  the  cup  is  the  covenant,  but  all  believe  that  he  means  to  call 
it  the  memorial,  or  the  sign,  or  the  seal  of  the  covenant.  If  it  be 
understood,  that,  agreeably  to  the  analogy  of  language,  he  uses  a 
similar  figure  when  he  says,  '  This  is  my  body,'  and  that  he  means 
nothing  more  than,  '  This  is  the  sign  of  my  body,'  we  are  delivered 
from  all  the  absurdities  implied  in  the  literal  interpretation,  to  which 
the  Roman  Catholics  think  it  necessary  to  adhere.  We  give  the 
words  a  more  natural  interpretation  than  the  Lutherans  do,  who 
consider  '  This  is  my  body,  as  intended  to  express  a  proposition 
which  is  totally  different,  '  My  body  is  with  this ;'  and  we  escape 
from  the  difficulties  in  which  they  are  involved  by  their  forced 
interpretation. 

"Farther,  by  this  method  of  interpretation,  there  is  no  ground 
left  for  that  adoration  which  the  Church  of  Rome  pays  to  the  bread 
and  wine  ;  for  they  are  only  the  signs  of  that  which  is  believed  to 
be  absent.  There  is  no  ground  for  accounting  the  Lord's  Supper, 
to  the  dishonour  of '  the  High  Priest  of  our  profession,'  a  new  sacri- 
fice presented  by  an  earthly  Priest ;  for  the  bread  and  wine  are 
only  the  memorials  of  that  sacrifice  which  was  once  offered  on  the 

(5)  Exod.  xii,  11. 


FOURTH. j  rHEOLOGICAl]   INSTITUTES.  421 

cross.  And,  lastly,  this  interpretation  destroys  the  Popish  idea  of 
a  physical  virtue  in  the  Lord's  Supper ;  for  if  the  bread  and  wine 
are  signs  of  what  is  absent,  their  use  must  be  to  excite  the  remem- 
brance of  it ;  but  this  is  a  use  which  cannot  possibly  exist  with 
regard  to  any,  but  those  whose  minds  are  thereby  put  into  a  proper 
frame  ;  and  therefore  the  Lord's  Supper  becomes,  instead  of  a 
charm,  a  mental  exercise,  and  the  efficacy  of  it  arises  not  ex  opera 
operato,  but  ex  opere  operantis" 

With  much  truth,  this  opinion  falls  short  of  the  whole  truth,  and 
therefore  it  has  been  made  the  basis  of  that  view  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  which  reduces  it  to  a  mere  religious  commemoration  of 
the  death  of  Christ,  with  this  addition,  that  it  has  a  natural  fitness  to 
produce  salutary  emotions,  to  possess  our  minds  with  religious 
reflections,  and  to  strengthen  virtuous  resolutions.  Some  Divines 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  Socinians  generally,  have 
adopted,  and  endeavoured  to  defend,  this  interpretation. 

The  fourth  opinion  is  that  of  the  Reformed  Churches,  and  was 
taught  with  great  success  by  Calvin.  It  has  been  thus  well  epito- 
mized by  Dr.  Hill : — 

"  He  knew  that  former  attempts  to  reconcile  the  systems  of 
Luther  and  Zuinglius  had  proved  fruitless.    But  he  saw  the  import- 
ance of  uniting  Protestants  upon  a  point,  with  respect  to  which  they 
agreed  in  condemning  the  errors  of  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  and  his 
zeal  in  renewing  the  attempt  was  probably  quickened  by  the  sincere 
friendship  which  he  entertained  for  Melancthon,  who  was  the  suc- 
cessor of  Luther,  while  he  himself  had  succeeded  Zuinglius  in 
conducting  the  Reformation  in  Switzerland.     He  thought  that  the 
system  of  Zuinglius  did  not  come  up  to  the  force  of  the  expressions 
used  in  Scripture  ;  and,  although  he  did  not  approve  of  the  manner 
in  Avhich  the  Lutherans  explain  these  expressions,  it  appeared  to 
him  that  there  was  a  sense  in  which  the  full  significancy  of  them 
might  be  preserved,-  and  a  great  part  of  the  Lutheran  language 
might  continue  to  be  used.     As  he  agreed  with  Zuinglius,  in  think- 
ing that  the  bread  and  wine  were  the  signs  of  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ,  which  were  not  locally  present,   he  renounced  both 
transubstantiation  and  consubstantiation.     He  agreed  farther  with 
Zuinglius,  in  thinking  that  the  use  of  these  signs,  being  a  memorial 
of  the  sacrifice  once  offered  on  the  cross,  was  intended  to  produce 
a  moral  effect.     But  he  taught,  that  to  all  who  remember  the  death 
of  Christ  in  a  proper  manner,  Christ,  by  the  use  of  these  signs,  is 
spiritually  present, — present  to  their  minds  ;  and  he  considered  this 
spiritual  presence  as  giving  a  significancy,  that  goes  far  beyond  the 
Socinian  sense,  to  these  words  of  Paul :  'The  cup  of  blessing  wbiob 
Vol.  IIT  44 


4$g  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PART 

we  bless,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  blood  of  Christ  1  the  bread 
which  we  break,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ  V 
It  is  not  the  blessing  pronounced  which  makes  any  change  upon 
the  cup ;  but  to  all  who  join  with  becoming  affection  in  the  thanks- 
giving then  uttered  in  the  name  of  the  congregation,  Christ  is 
spiritually  present,  so  that  they  may  emphatically  be  said  to  partake, 
xoivuvsn,  it.BTSX'iv,  of  his  body  and  blood  ;  because  his  body  and 
blood  being  spiritually  present,  convey  the  same  nourishment  to 
their  souls,  the  same  quickening  to  the  spiritual  life,  as  bread  and 
wine  do  to  the  natural  life.  Hence  Calvin  was  led  to  connect  the 
discourse  in  John  vi,  with  the  Lord's  Supper ;  not  in  that  literal 
sense  which  is  agreeable  to  Popish  and  Lutheran  ideas,  as  if  the 
body  of  Christ  was  really  eaten,  and  his  blood  really  drunk  by  any  : 
but  in  a  sense  agreeable  to  the  expression  of  our  Lord  in  the  con- 
clusion of  that  discourse,  '  The  words  that  I  speak  unto  you,  they 
are  spirit  and  they  are  life ;'  that  is,  when  I  say  to  you,  '  Whoso 
eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood,  dwelleth  in  me  and  I  in 
him ;  he  shall  live  by  me,  for  my  flesh  is  meat  indeed,'  you  are  to 
understand  these  words,  not  in  a  literal  but  in  a  spiritual  sense. 
The  spiritual  sense  adopted  by  the  Socinians  is  barely  this,  that  the 
doctrine  of  Christ  is  the  food  of  the  soul,  by  cherishing  a  life  of 
virtue  here,  and  the  hope  of  a  glorious  life  hereafter.  The  Calvin- 
ists  think,  that  into  the  full  meaning  of  the  figure  used  in  these 
words,  there  enter  not  merely  the  exhortations  and  instructions 
which  a  belief  of  the  Gospel  affords,  but  also  that  union  between 
Christ  and  his  people  which  is  the  consequence  of  faith,  and  that 
communication  of  grace  and  strength  by  which  they  are  quick- 
ened in  well  doing,  and  prepared  for  the  discharge  of  every 
duty. 

"According  to  this  system,  the  full  benefit  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
is  peculiar  to  those  who  partake  worthily.  For  while  all  who  eat 
the  bread  and  drink  the  wine  may  be  said  to  show  the  Lord's  death, 
and  may  also  receive  some  devout  impressions,  they  only  to  whom 
Jesus  is  spiritually  present  share  in  that  spiritual  nourishment  which 
arises  from  partaking  of  his  body  and  blood.  According  to  this 
system,  eating  and  drinking  unworthily  has  a  further  sense  than 
enters  into  the  Socinian  system  ;  and  it  becomes  the  duty  of  every 
Christian  to  examine  himself,  not  only  with  regard  to  his  know- 
ledge, but  also  with  regard  to  his  general  conduct,  before  he  eats 
of  that  bread  and  drinks  of  that  cup.  It  becomes  also  the  duty  of 
those  who  have  the  inspection  of  Christian  societies,  to  exclude 
from  this  ordinance  persons,  of  whom  there  is  every  reason  to 
believe  that  they  are  strangers  to  the  sentiments  which  it  presun- 


■  m  it  111.  J  rHEOLOGIOAL  INJSTIT1    I  && 

poses,  and  without  which  none  are  prepared  for  holding  that  com- 
munion with  Jesus  which  it  implies."(6) 

With  this  view  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England  seems 
mainly  to  agree,  except  that  we  may  perhaps  perceive  in  her 
services,  a  few  expressions  somewhat  favourable  to  the  views  of 
Luther  and  Melancthon,  whose  authority  had  great  weight  with 
Archbishop  Cranmer.  This,  however,  appears  only  in  certain 
phrases;  for  the  twenty-eighth  article  declares  with  sufficient  plain- 
ness, that  "  the  body  of  Christ  is  given,  taken,  and  eaten  in  the 
Supper  only  after  a  heavenly  and  spiritual  manner ;  and  the  mean 
whereby  the  body  of  Christ  is  received  and  eaten  in  the  Supper,  is 
faith."  "  Some  of  our  early  English  Reformers,"  says  Bishop 
Tomline,  "were  Lutherans,  and  consequently  they  were  at  first 
disposed  to  lean  towards  consubstantiation  ;  but  they  seem  soon  to 
have  discovered  their  error,  for  in  the  articles  of  1552,  it  is  ex- 
pressly said,  '  A  faithful  man  ought  not  either  to  believe  or  openly 
confess  the  real  and  bodily  presence,  as  they  term  it,  of  Christ's 
flesh  and  blood  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper.'  This  part 
of  the  article  was  omitted  in  1562,  probably  with  a  view  to  give 
less  offence  to  those  who  maintained  the  corporal  presence,  and 
to  comprehend  as  many  as  possible  in  the  established  Church."  (7) 
The  article  as  it  now  stands,  and  not  particular  expressions  in  the 
Liturgy,  must  however  be  taken  to  be  the  opinion  of  the  Church 
of  England  upon  this  point,  and  it  substantially  agrees  with  the 
New  Testament. 

The  sacramental  character  of  this  ordinance  is  the  first  point 
to  be  established,  in  order  to  a  true  conception  of  its  nature  and 
import.  It  is  more  than  a  commemorative  rite,  it  is  commemorative 
sacramentally ;  in  other  words,  it  is  a  commemorative  sign  and 
seal  of  the  covenant  of  our  redemption. 

The  first  proof  of  this  may  be  deduced  from  our  Lord's  words 
used  in  the  institution  of  the  ordinance  :  "This  is  my  body,  this  is  my 
blood,"  are  words  which  show  a  most  intimate  connexion  between 
the  elements,  and  that  which  was  represented  by  them,  the  sacri- 
ficial offering  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  as  the  price  of  our 
redemption  ;  they  were  the  signs  of  what  was  "  given  for  us,"  sur- 
rendered to  death  in  our  room  and  stead,  that  we  might  have  the 
benefit  of  liberation  from  eternal  death.  Again,  "  This  is  the  New 
Testament,"  or  covenant,  "  in  my  blood."  The  covenant  itself  was 
ratified  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  it  is  therefore  called  by  St.  Paul, 
"  the  blood  of  the  everlasting  covenant ;"  and  the  cup  had  so  inti- 

(6)  Theological  Ledum.  (7)  Exposition  of  the  Articles. 


{:J4  PHEOLOGICAL    INSTITUTES-  [PARI 

mate  a  connection  with  that  covenant,  as  to  represent  it  and  the. 
means  of  its  establishment,  or  of  its  acquiring  validity, — the  shedding 
of  the  blood  of  our  Saviour.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  the  rite  of 
the  Lord's  Supper  is  a  covenant  rite,  and  consequently  a  sacrament ; 
a  visible  sign  and  seal  on  the  part  of  Him  who  made  the  covenant, 
that  it  was  established  in,  and  ratified  by,  the  sacrificial  death  of 
Christ. 

As  it  bears  this  covenant  or  sacramental  character  on  the  part 
of  the  Institutor,  so  also  on  the  part  of  the  recipients.  They  were 
all  to  eat  the  bread  in  "  remembrance"  of  Christ ;  in  remembrance, 
certainly,  of  his  death  in  particular ;  yet  not  as  a  mere  historical 
event,  but  of  his  death  as  sacrificial;  and  therefore  the  comme- 
moration was  to  be  on  their  part  an  acknowledgment  of  the  doc- 
trine of  the  vicarious  and  propitiatory  nature  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  and  an  act  of  faith  in  it.  Then  as  to  the  cup,  they  were 
commanded  to  drink  of  it,  for  a  reason  also  particularly  given, 
"  For  this  is  my  blood  of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  shed  for 
many  for  the  remission  of  sins  :"  the  recognition  therefore,  implied 
in  the  act,  was  not  merely  that  Christ's  blood  was  shed  ;  but  that 
it  was  shed  as  the  blood  of  "the  new  covenant,"  and  for  "the 
remission  of  sins ;"  a  recognition  which  could  only  take  place  in 
consequence  of  "  faith  in  his  blood,"  as  the  blood  of  atonement. 
Again,  says  St.  Paul,  as  taught  by  the  particular  revelation  he 
received  as  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  "For  as  often  as  ye  eat  this 
bread,  and  drink  this  cup,  ye  do  show  or  publish  the  Lord's  death 
until  he  come  ;"  which  publication  of  his  death  was  not  the  mere 
declaration  of  the  fact  of  "  the  Lord's  death,"  but  of  his  death, 
according  to  the  Apostolic  doctrine,  as  the  true  propitiation  for 
sin,  the  benefits  of  which  were  to  be  received  by  faith.  Thus  then 
we  see  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  the  visible  token  and  pledge  of  a 
covenant  of  mercy  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  exhibited  by  God  its 
author ;  and  on  the  part  of  man  a  visible  acknowledgment  of  this 
covenant  so  ratified  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  and  an  act  of  entire 
faith  in  its  truth  and  efficacy  in  order  to  the  remission  of  sins,  and 
the  conferring  of  all  other  spiritual  benefits.  As  a  sign,  it  exhibits, 
1.  The  infinite  love  of  God  to  the  world,  who  gave  "his  only- 
begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  him  might  not  perish, 
but  have  everlasting  life."  2.  The  love  of  Christ,  who  "  died  the 
just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God."  3.  The 
extreme  nature  of  his  sufferings,  which  were  unto  death.  4.  The 
vicarious  and  sacrificial  character  of  that  death,  as  a  sin  offering 
and  a  propitiation ;  in  virtue  of  which  only,  a  covenant  of  grace 
was  entered  into  with  man  bv  the  offended  God.     5.  The  benefits' 


FOURTH.]  iHEULOGICAL  INSTITUTES-  125 

derived  from  it  through  believing,  "  remission  of  sins ;"  and  the 
nourishment  of  the  soul  in  spiritual  life  and  vigour,  by  virtue  of  a 
vital  "  communion"  with  Christ,  so  that  it  is  advanced  and  per- 
fected in  holiness,  "until  he  come"  to  confer  upon  his  disciples 
the  covenanted  blessing  of  eternal  life.  As  a  seal  it  is  a  constant 
assurance,  on  the  part  of  God,  of  the  continuance  of  this  covenant 
of  redemption  in  full  undiminished  force  from  age  to  age  ;  it  is  a 
pledge  to  every  penitent  who  believes  in  Christ,  and  receives  this 
sacrament  in  profession  of  his  entire  reliance  upon  the  merits  of 
Christ's  passion  for  forgiveness,  that  he  is  an  object  of  merciful 
regard  and  acceptance ;  there  is  in  it  also,  as  to  every  one  who 
thus  believes  and  is  accepted,  a  constant  exhibition  of  Christ  as 
the  spiritual  food  of  the  soul,  to  be  received  by  faith,  that  he  may 
grow  thereby ;  and  a  renewed  assurance  of  the  bestowment  of  the 
full  grace  of  the  new  covenant,  in  the  accomplishment  of  all  its 
promises,  both  in  this  life  and  in  that  which  is  to  come.  In  every 
celebration,  the  sign  of  all  these  gracious  acts,  provisions,  and 
hopes,  is  exhibited,  and  God  condescends  thus  to  repeat  his  pledges 
of  faithfulness  and  love  to  the  Church  of  Christ,  purchased  by  his 
blood.  The  members  of  that  Church,  on  the  other  hand,  renew 
their  acceptance  of,  and  reliance  upon,  the  new  covenant ;  they 
publish  their  faith  in  Christ ;  they  glory  in  his  cross,  his  sacrificial 
though  shameful  death,  as  the  wisdom  of  God,  and  the  power  of 
God ;  they  feast  upon  the  true  passover  victim  by  their  faith,  and 
they  do  this  with  joy  and  thanksgiving,  on  account  of  a  greater 
deliverance  than  that  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt,  of  which  they 
are  the  subjects.  It  was  this  predominance  of  thanksgiving  in 
celebrating  this  hallowed  rite,  which  at  so  early  a  period  of  the 
Church  attached  to  the  Lord's  Supper  the  title  of  "  The  Eu- 
charist." 

We  may  conclude  this  view  by  a  few  general  observations. 

1.  The  very  nature  of  the  ordinance  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
excludes  from  participating  in  it  not  only  open  unbelievers,  but  all 
who  reject  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement  made  by  the  vicarious 
death  of  Christ  for  "  the  remission  of  sins."  Such  persons  have 
indeed  tacitly  acknowledged  this,  by  reducing  the  rite  to  a  mere 
commemoration  of  the  fact  of  Christ's  death,  and  of  those  virtues 
of  humility,  benevolence,  and  patience,  which  his  sufferings  called 
forth.  If  therefore  the  Lord's  Supper  be  in  truth  much  more  than 
this ;  if  it  recognise  the  sacrificial  character  of  Christ's  death,  and 
the  doctrine  of  "  faith  in  his  blood,"  as  necessary  to  our  salvation, 
this  is  "  an  altar  of  which  they  have  no  right  to  eat"  who  reject 
these  doctrines :  and  from  the  Lord's  table  all  such  persons  ought 


12t>  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  [PAR! 

to  be  repelled  by  ministers,  whenever,  from  compliance  with  custom, 
or  other  motives,  they  would  approach  it. 

2.  It  is  equally  evident  that  when  there  is  no  evidence  in  persons 
of  true  repentance  for  sin,  and  of  desire  for  salvation,  according  to 
the  terms  of  the  Gospel,  they  are  disqualified  from  partaking  at 
"  the  table  of  the  Lord."  They  eat  and  drink  unworthily,  and  fall 
therefore  into  "  condemnation."  The  whole  act  is  indeed  on  their 
part  an  act  of  bold  profanation  or  of  hypocrisy ;  they  profess  by 
this  act  to  repent,  and  have  no  sorrow  for  sin ;  they  profess  to 
seek  deliverance  from  its  guilt  and  power,  and  yet  remain  willingly 
under  its  bondage  ;  they  profess  to  trust  in  Christ's  death  for  par- 
don, and  are  utterly  unconcerned  respecting  either ;  they  profess 
to  feed  upon  Christ,  and  hunger  and  thirst  after  nothing  but  the 
world ;  they  place  before  themselves  the  sufferings  of  Christ ;  but 
when  they  "  look  upon  him  whom  they  have  pierced,"  they  do  not 
"  mourn  because  of  him,"  and  they  grossly  offend  the  all-present 
Majesty  of  heaven,  by  thus  making  light  of  Christ,  and  "  grieving 
the  Holy  Spirit." 

3.  It  is  a  part  of  Christian  discipline  in  every  religious  society 
to  prevent  such  persons  from  communicating  with  the  Church. 
They  are  expressly  excluded  by  Apostolic  authority,  as  well  as  by 
the  original  institution  of  this  sacrament,  which  was  confined  to 
Christ's  disciples  ;  and  ministers  would  "  partake  of  other  men's 
sins,"  if  knowingly  they  were  to  admit  to  the  Supper  of  the  Lord, 
those  who  in  their  spirit  and  lives  deny  him. 

4.  On  the  other  hand,  the  table  of  the  Lord  is  not  to  be  sur- 
rounded with  superstitious  terrors.  All  are  welcome  there  who 
truly  love  Christ,  and  all  who  sincerely  desire  to  love,  serve,  and 
obey  him.  All  truly  penitent  persons  ;  all  who  feel  the  burden  of 
their  sins,  and  are  willing  to  renounce  them ;  all  who  take  Christ 
as  the  sole  foundation  of  their  hope,  and  are  ready  to  commit 
their  eternal  interests  to  the  merits  of  his  sacrifice  and  intercession, 
are  to  be  encouraged  to  "  draw  near  with  faith,  and  to  take  this 
holy  sacrament  to  their  comfort."  In  it  God  visibly  exhibits  and 
confirms  his  covenant  to  them,  and  he  invites  them  to  become 
parties  to  it,  by  the  act  of  their  receiving  the  elements  of  the 
sacrament  in  faith. 

5.  For  the  frequency  of  celebrating  this  ordinance  we  have  no 
rale  in  the  New  Testament.  The  early  Christians  observed  it 
every  Sabbath,  and  exclusion  from  it  was  considered  a  severe 
sentence  of  the  Church,  when  only  temporary.  The  expression 
of  the  Apostle,  "  as  often  as  ye  eat  this  bread,"  intimates  that  the 
practice  of  communion  was  frequent ;  and  perhaps  the  general 


FOURTH.]  THEOLOGICAL   INSTITUTES.  427 

custom  in  this  country  of  a  monthly  administration,  will  come  up 
to  the  spirit  of  the  ancient  institution.  That  it  was  designed,  like 
the  Passover,  to  be  an  annual  celebration  only,  has  no  evidence 
from  Scripture,  and  is  contradicted  by  the  most  ancient  practice. 

6.  The  habitual  neglect  of  this  ordinance  by  persons  who  pro- 
fess a  true  faith  in  Christ,  is  highly  censurable.  We  speak  not  now 
of  Quakers  and  Mystics,  who  reject  it  altogether,  in  the  face  of  the 
letter  of  their  Bibles  ;  but  of  many  who  seldom  or  never  communi- 
cate, principally  from  habits  of  inattention  to  an  obligation  which 
they  do  not  profess  to  deny.  In  this  case  a  plain  command  of 
Christ  is  violated,  though  not  perhaps  with  direct  intention ;  and 
the  benefit  of  that  singularly  affecting  mean  of  grace  is  lost,  in 
which  our  Saviour  renews  to  us  the  pledges  of  his  love,  repeats 
the  promises  of  his  covenant,  and  calls  for  invigorated  exercises  of 
our  faith,  only  to  feed  us  the  more  richly  with  the  bread  that  comes 
down  from  heaven.  If  a  peculiar  condemnation  falls  upon  them 
who  partake  "  unworthily,"  then  a  peculiar  blessing  must  follow 
from  partaking  worthily ;  and  it  therefore  becomes  the  duty  of 
every  minister  to  explain  the  obligation,  and  to  show  the  advan- 
tages of  this  sacrament,  and  earnestly  to  enforce  its  regular  ob- 
servance upon  all  those  who  give  satisfactory  evidence  of  "repent- 
ance towards  God,  and  faith  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 


CONTENTS  TO  VOLUME  III. 


PART  II— Continued. 

CHAP.  XXV.  Extent  of  the  Atonement 3 

XXVI.  The  same  subject  continued  26 

XXVII.  An  examination  of  certain  passages  of  Scripture  supposed  to  limit  the 

extent  of  Christ's  redemption 87 

XXVTII.  Theories  which  limit  the  extent  of  the  death  of  Christ 107 

XXIX.  Redemption,  benefits  of,   183 

PART  III. — The  Mokals  of  Christianity. 

CHAP.     I.  The  moral  law 203 

II.  The  duties  we  owe  to  God   216 

III.  The  same  subject  continued — The  Lord's  day   247 

IV.  Duties  to  our  neighbour  265 

PART  IV. — The  Institutions  of  Christianity. 

CHAP.     I.  The  Christian  Church  SI" 

II.  The  Sacraments 355 

III.  Baptism 363 

IV.  The  Lord's  Supper   415 

Index  of  Texts 428 

<  >  i^noral  Index 43? 


TEXTS 

MORE  OR  LESS  ILLUSTRATED. 


Una 
1 

>.  Verses. 

1 

22 
14 

7 

5 
21 

6 

1 

6 

7 

1 

7-14 

2 
23 
10 
18 

14 

3 
11 

25  26 
20 
20 

12-16 
19 

6 

21  29 
15  16 
25 

31 

10  11 
49 

8 
27 
D 

7 
22 

7 
15  16 

22  23 
15  16 
15  16 
11 

6 
29 
43 

6 

21 

7 
10 
19 

GENESIS. 

Vol. 
1 

2 

3 
2 

1 

3 
2 
3 
1 
2 

1 
2 
1 
2 

1 

2 
3 
1 

2 

3 

2 
1 
KY. 
2 
1 
3 

2 
3 
1 

3 
I 

2 

3 

2 
1 
3 
2 

Pages. 

225  521 
72  187 
354 
359 
232 
233 
278 

68 
449 

71 
457 
365 
361 

35 
200 

72 

520 
385 
170  187 
385 
121 
543 
332 
36 
290 

343 
333 
343 
334 
332 
272 

287 
523 

71 
562 
297 
307 
285 
272 
204 
533 
377 
202 

71 

236 

69 
216 
272 
420 

Chap  Verses. 

18    24 

1 
17    19 

5  7 
11    12 

14  4 

15  14 
16 

20      4  5. 

31  33 
33      4 

2      7 
14      2  3 

32  1 

33  6 
51      5 
58      3 
72      5 
100    3 
104  27 
106  30  31 
110    1 
122    6 

8    22 

16  4 

22  15 

29  15 

30  4 

6  1,  &c. 

48    16 

8  8 

9  6 

34  16 
40      3  6 

3 
43      8 

45  24 

46  5 
48     16 

53      3,&c 

18 
19 

23  5  6 

33  6 
16 

34  2 

1  KINGS. 

Vol. 
2 

:s. 
2 

2 

2 

1 
2 

3 

2 
3 
2 

1 

1 

2 
3 
2 

1 
2 

1 

2 

3 
2 

1 

Pages. 
71 

*} 

CHRONICLI 

4 

69 

JOB. 

6 

g 

233 

233 

9 
15 

233 

181  234 

236 

16 

17 

181 
181 

146 

90 

PSALMS. 

f>5 

33 

49 

235 

EXODUS. 

413 

146 

3 

234 

234 

7 

116 

10 

521 

fW 

147 

03 

LEVITICUS 

419 

30 

73 

33 
34 

PROVERBS 

225 

37 

4 

96 

r; 

234 

6 

234 

15 

40 

17 

ISAIAH. 

533 

25 

NUMBERS. 

525 
525 

0/\ 

149 

EUTERONOS 

98 

4 

15 

5 

85 

6 
10 
21 
0^ 

525 
555 

8 
4 

9R 

414 

30 

95 

30 

148 

31 

209 

32 

1  SAMUEL. 

283 

90 

JEREMIAH 

39 

2  SAMUEL 

43 

7 
R 

5  414 
414 

9 

5  414 

19 

218 

rjLATs   ILLUSTRATE!*. 


429 


1 
?8 

1.    \  CI'-.:-. 

2 

11 

27 
19 

11 

7 
5 

32 

4-7 

2 

1 

4 
6 

14  15 

23 

3 
11 
17 
11 
20* 
31 
33 

4-6 
18 

4  5 

3-9 
13 
17-19 

15  16 
28 

1-14 
24 
28 
63 
20 
19 
30 

45 
32 
14 

16 
35 
19 

47  4S 
20 

13  14 
47 
51 

1 

3 
10 
11 

'ot.  Ill 

EZEKIEL. 

Vol. 
o 

1 

2 

2 
2 

2 

1 
2 

2 
I. 
3 

O 

O 

1 

3 

2 

3 
2 

3 

2 
3 

2 
3 
1 
2 

3 
2 
3 
2 

3 
2 

o 

Pages. 

12 

99 

219 

44 

287 

45 

287 

9 

DANIEL. 

11 

f> 

HOSEA. 

236 

19! 

4 

9 

JOEL. 

8 

o 

HAGGAI. 

526 

149 

5 

10 

I 

MICAII. 

ZECHAR1AI 

MALACHI. 

33 

225 

50 

•> 

1 
3 

MATTHEW 

521 

287 

14 

8 

406 

44 

7 

236 

10 

144 

T> 

155 

14 

108 

15 

18 

295 
350 

19 

182 

287 
68 

206 

20 

90 
298 

22 
5>4 

77 
175 

°6 

305 

49 

*>R 

88 

150 

10 
13 

MARK. 

303 

280 
91 

m 

389 

i 

LUKE. 

8    15 

57 

q 

105 

388 

10 

96 

18 

398 

24 
1 

JOHN. 

277 
108 

16    67 

97 

17 

28 

i 

45 

Chap.  Versos. 

14        

Vol 
2 

Pages. 
45 

15        

1 

531 

49        

2 

31 

3      8        

236 

22  23 

3 

410 

31        

1 

536 

5    18        

o 

62 

37        

43 

6    37        

o 

87 

64        

2 

95 

S    58       

1 

536 

10    15        

3 

11 

26        

90 

29        

2 

49 

33        

12    23  24  

62 

27S 

37-40  

3 

97 

41        

1 

524 

13    18        

3 

91 

14    16        

2 

56 

15    16        

3 

92 

19        

71 

26        

2 

56 

16    15        

96 

17      5        

..   ..       1 

539 

9        

3 

11 

20    22        

2 

144 

22  23 

•* 

351 

ACTS. 
2    39        3 

78  385 

38        

363 

5      4        

9 

156 

7    35        

298 

59        

109 

8    38  39  

3 

409 

10    41        

3 

338 

13    38  39    

2 

398 

13    15        

3 

324 

38        

2 

305 

48       

3 

94 

14     11        

2 

12 

23        

3 

338 

15    21        

238 

17    29        

2 

167 

18      9  10  

28    25        

3 

2 

I 

106 
311 
525 

2 

149 

o 

99 

ROMANS. 
1      34    2 

50 

21        

120 

5  6    

3 

78 

2    28        

377 

3    10        

2 

235 

21  22 

24        

415 

297  303 

25  26 

. 

287  307 

. 

398 

31          

3 

250 

4      3 

2 

419 

4-8    . 

398  421 

28 

. 

281 

5      6-8 

. 

280 

- 

591  292 

430 


TEXTS   ILLUSTRATED. 


Chap.  Verses. 

12-21 

Vol 
3 

Pages. 
126 

18  19 

2 

221  417 

421 

6      16 
3-7 

3 

185 
412 

7      l,&c 
18 

3 

2 

184  250 
237 

S      1 

237  461 

3  4 

55 

3 

188 

5-9 
17 

2 

2 

237 

459 

15  16 

30 

3 

463 

80 

9      l,&c 

5 

24 

9 
3 

33 
22 

79 

10    13 

9 

8 

19 

3 

30 

11      5 

53 

6 

2 

443 

7 

3 

30  53 

12    12 

224 

14    15 

12 

1 
1      2 

CORINTHIANS. 
2 

112 

30 

416 

2      8 

311 

3      3 

236 

4      7 

3 

101 

5      3 

o 

88 

6    19  20 

297 

7    14 

3 

387 

10  9 

11  23-26 

1 

3 

557 

416 

15  35 

16  15 

194 
96  396 

2  CORINTHIANS. 
3      6        2 

155 

5      6 

3 

192 

21 

2 

284  416 

18  19 

291  294 

7      1 

3 

183 

1      6 

GALATIANS. 

78 

2    16 

369 

21 
3    13 

19 

1 

405  429 

248  285 

297 

562 

3 

369 

21 

Q 

429 

27-29 

3 

372 

4      4-6 

o 

463 

21-31 

3 

56 

5      2-4 
1      4-6 

EPHESIANS. 
3 

368 
73 

7 

9 

288  297 

9 

3 

306 
357 

2    16 

9 

294 

3      4-6 

3 

93 

4      8 

1 

556 

11 

o 

320 

Chan.  Veraes.  Vol.  Pages. 

22-24 2    170  23G 

5  2        -  344 

25        . 3  291 

6  5        -  301 

3  4    -  293 

PHILIPPIANS. 

2      5        2  124 

4  6        3  224 

COLOSSIANS. 

1  14   2  137 

14  15 -  100  311 

19   -  291 

16   -  89 

2  9   -  136 

10-12 3  372 

3  10   2  170 

1  THESSALONIANS. 

5  23        3  183 

2  THESSALONIANS. 

2      8  9    1  175 

13  14 3  72 

16        2  112 

1  TIMOTHY. 

1  6        2  337 

2  6        -  29S 

13  14 -  183 

6  14        -  92 

2  TIMOTHY. 

1  6        3  322 

9  10 -  80    93 

2  19        -  90 

4  18        2  117 

22        -  112 

TITUS. 

2  13        2  18 

3  7        -  459 

5  6    3  407 

HEBREWS. 

1      1        2  147 

2        -  98 

3        -  136 

1  5        2  35    55 

6        -  113 

8        -  20 

10        -  87 

2  14        -  136 

3  6        -  55 

4  12        -  90 

15        -  137 

6  4-8    3  15 

7  27        2  345 

9    13  14 -  345 

27 -  346 

10  26-31 3  15 

11  6        2  377 

4        -  355 

19        3  365 

26        1  557 

12  25  26 -  558 

13  8        2  87 

JAMES. 

2    19-23 2  448 

1  PETER. 

1      2        3  72 

3        2  459 


)hap.  \. 
11 

fSi  - 

19 
21 

Vol. 

2 

I 

3 

o 

3 

2 

2 

I'ages. 
147 
297 
283 
557 
373 

147 

13  101 

117 

309 

286 
358 

Chap 
4 

18 
2    24 

5 

3     18 

1 

20 
1    21 

2  PETER. 

2      1 

1 

3    18 

1       !) 

1  JOHN. 

g      2 

3     12 

22 

1NDKA.  431 

i.  Verse.-;.  Vol.    Pages. 

10         2  280 

7        1  526 

2  JOHN. 

1        3  322 

JUDE. 

4        3  100 

REVELATION. 

4  5    2  86 

8        -       86    95 

17        -  85 

20        3  355 

13        2  85 


GENERAL  INDEX 


Vol.  Page. 
A 

Abel's  sacrifice 2  354 

Actions,  quality  of, 1  5 

Adam,  relation  of.tohisdescend- 

ants 2  215 

3  126 

imputation  of  his  sin.. .  2  216 

418 

3  126 

Adam's  fall  not  willed  by  God.  -  158 

Adoption,  what 2  462 

African  slavery 3  273 

Agency,  moral, 1  5 

Angel  of  the  Lord,  phrase  of, .  -   -  542 

Angel  of  the  Church 3  323 

Archbishops,  origin  of -  326 

Arianism 2  141 

Ark,  dimensions  of,. . .    1  282 

ArticleXVlIofEnglishChurch.  3  139 

Articles  of  faith -  345 

Astronomical      objections      to 

Scripture  answered 1  267 

Atonement, -  229 

what, 2  286 

objections  to,  answered  -  296 
302 

extent  of, 3  3 

Augsburgh  Confession 3  139 

B 

Baptism,  form  of, 2  150 

infant,  antiquity  of . .   3  397 

benefits  of,...   -  400 

mode  of, -  401 

nature  of, -  363 

376 

obligation  of, -  363 

of  houses -  392 

of  John -  406 

if  proselytes -  383 


Vol.  Page. 
Baptism  put  in  the  place  of  cir- 
cumcision   3  370 

379 

subjects  of, -  381 

Baxterianism -  140 

Beasts,  clean  and  unclean 2  352 

Believers,  true,  may  perish ....  3  5 
Bishops,  differ  not  in  order  from 

Presbyters -  323 

328 

office  of, -  321 

succession  of, -  328 

Blood,  prohibition  of, 2  362 

Body,  human,  affords  proof  of 

God's  existence 1  329 

Budhu,  religion  of, -  24 

C 

Calling,  what, 3  77 

85 

Calvinistic  theories -  107 

Calvin's  opinions -  108 

Casuistry -  212 

Cause  and  Effect,  relation  of,...  1  303 

Causes,  kinds  of, -  304 

Charity,  active  expression  of,  3  267 

source  of, -  265 

universal, -  265 

Children,  duties  of, -  293 

government  of, -  29S 

Christ,  acts  of,   proofs  of  his 

divinity, 2  97 

attributes  of,  divine, 2  84 

death  of,  merits  of,  ... .   -  310 

necessary  ....   -  275 

propitiatory. ..  -  274 

vicarious -  278 

died  for  all  men 3  4 

humanity  of, 2  130 

pioexistence  of, 1  530 

resurrection  of, -  163 


462 


iSUKX 


Vol.  Page. 

Christ,  the  Creator 2  97 

the  Jehovah  of  the  Old 

Testament 1  541 

titles  of, 2  3 

worship  paid  to, -  107 

Christianity,   connects  morals 

with  doctrines. .  3  209 

diffusion  of, 1  254 

effects  of, -  257 

Church  authority,  ends  of, ... .  3  344 

in  censures .  -  349 

in  discipline  -  347 

in  doctrine..  -  346 

government  in, -  318 

spiritual..  -  318 
persons  to 

whom  committed, . .   -  320 

of  Christ,  what, -  317 

Reformed,  what, -  116 

unity  of -  332 

<'hurches,  free  associations. .  .  -  335 
laws  of  Christ  impe- 
rative upon, -  337 

339 

liberty  in  forms  of,  -  343 
share  of  the  people 

in  government  of,  -  337 
Circumcision,    controversy  in 

primitive  Church  -  367 

remarks  on, -  365 

Confession,  Augsburgh, -  139 

Confessions  of  faith -  345 

Conscience,  right  of, -  282 

Councils,  origin  of, -  345 

Covenant,  Abrahamic, -  365 

D 

Deacons,  office  of, 3  321 

Death  eternal 2  219 

of  Christ,  necessary ....   -  274 

not  unjust. .. .   -  322 

propitiatory  . .   -  274 

vicarious -  278 

spiritual, -  211 

victory  over, 3  191 

what,  as  effect  of  sin... .  2  211 

Decrees,  object  of, 3  119 

what, -  154 

Diocesses,  primitive -  325 

Dort,  Synod  of, .  23 

69 
130 

Duelling,  sinfulness  of, -  379 

Duties  of  children -  293 

of  husbands  and  wives  -  286 
291 

of  masters -  299 

of  parents -  296 

of  servants -  299 

of  sovereigns -  307 

of  subjects .  304 

308 

we  owe  to  God -  216 

E 

RroNoiwicAi,  justice 3  285 


Vol.  jfafc'c 

Egypt,  plagues  of, 1     159 

187 

Elders,  office  of, 3    321 

Election  and  calling,  what,. .. .  -  31 
eternal  and  temporal, . .  -  61 
of  the  Christian  Church  -       32 

of  the  Jews -       31 

personal  and  collective,  -       33 
60 

three  kinds  of, -       28 

unconditional, -       48 

62 
69 

unto  faith -       76 

Emmanuel,  title  of  Christ 2      14 

'  Episcopacy,  matter  of  pruden- 
tial regulation . .  3    329 

remarks  on, -     321 

332 
Eternity,  attribute  of  Christ.. .  2      85 

Ethical  justice 3    270 

Evangelists,  what, -     320 

Evidence,  authenticating, 1      99 

collateral -     101 

254 

external, -       75 

internal, -       95 

223 

rational, 99 

Evil  spirits,  power  of, -    ,175 

Exceptions  to  moral  rules 3    211 

Excommunication,  what, -     318 

External  duties  to  God -     224 

F 

FAiTHjConditionofjustification,  2  437 

errors  respecting, -  441 

imputed  for  righteousness  -  422 

justifying, -  429 

433 
442 

not  mere  belief, -  451 

objections  to,  considered  -  438 

Fall,  account  of,  historical,. ...   -  182 

effects  of, -  205 

traditions  respecting,. .. .   -  188 
Fathers    of  families    invested 

with  a  religious  office, 3  235 

Fear  of  God -  222 

not  servile, -  222 

practical  effects  of,  -  223 

Foreknow,  to,  phrase  of, -  82 

"  Form  of  God,"  phrase  of, 2  127 

French  Church,  confession  of,  3  137 

G 

General  tendency,  doctrine  of,  3  213 
Geological  objections  to  Scrip- 
ture    1  272 

285 

Germ-theoryof  the  resurrection  3  199 

God,  acts  of, 1  291 

a  title  of  Christ, 2  9 

attributes  of, 1  293 

demonstrations  of,  a  poste- 
riori...  -  309 


INDEX 


idz 


Vol.  Page. 

•>ou,ciemon3lrationsof,  a  priori,  j  366 

duties  we  owe  to  him. ...  3  21C 

eternity  of, 1  392 

existence  of, -  224 

289 
293 
not  discovered 

by  reason,. .  -  297 

faithfulness  of, -  495 

goodness  of, -  456 

holiness  of, -  486 

2  259 

immutability  of, 1  442 

import  of  the  word, 2  9 

justice  of, 1  488 

2  259 

liberty  of, 1  449 

mercy  of, -  484 

names  of, -  290 

necessary  existence  of, . .  -  367 

omnipotence  of, -  399 

omnipresence  of, -  405 

omniscience  of, -  412 

prescience  of, -  416 

V                                           3  160 

perfect, 1  496 

proofs  of  his  being -  310 

spirituality  of, -  380 

truth  of, -  495 

.    unity  of, -  372 

unsearchable, ■  497 

wills  all  men  to  be  saved,  3  26 

wisdom  of, 1 

Government,  an  ordinance  of 

God 3 

of  Church,  spiritual,  - 

in  its  pastors,  - 

resistanceto,iflawful,  - 

share  of  the  people  in,  - 

Grace  of  God,  resistible - 


450 

304 
318 
320 
309 
337 
179 


Vol.  Page. 

Image  of  God,  what, 2  116 

Immutability  of  God,  what,...  1  442 

3  229 

Imputation,  what, 2  430 

Independent   form    of  Church 

government 3  333 

Infant  baptism -  381 

Infants,   members  of  Christ's 

Church, •  387 

salvation  of, 2  221 

3  68 

Influence,  employment  of,  ... .   -  303 


Jacob  and  Esau,  case  of, 3  34 

Jehovah,  title  of  Christ, 2  3 

Justice,  economical, 3  285 

ethical, -  270 

political -  304 

of  God,  what, 2  259 

Justification,  by  faith  alone,.. ..  -  436 

concomitants  of,..  -  459 

explained -  392 

just, -  307 

310 

not  at  the  last  day,  -  455 

not  eternal -  400 

not  imputation  of 
Christ's  right- 
eousness,  -  401 

not  sanctification,  -  401 

444 

pardon  of  sin. .. .   -  397 

Popish  notion  of,  -  441 

St.  James  and  St. 

Paul  reconciled 

on  doctrine  of,  -  447 


H 

Heathens,  case  of, 3 

morals  of, 1 

religions  of, - 

state    of  religious 
knowledge  among,  - 

Heylin,  Dr.,  defended, 3 

Holiness,  what, - 

Holy  Spirit,  divinity  of, 2 

influence  of, 1 

personality  of, —  2 


procession  of, - 

witness  of, - 

four  opi- 
nions respecting,  - 
Husband  and  wife,  duties  of,. .  3 

Hypostatical  union 2 

I 

Identity,  personal. 3    201 


177 
58 
63 

46 
134 
223 
145 
150 
240 
143 
145 
150 
143 
463 

465 
286 
290 
129 


K 

Keys,  power  of, 3 

King  of  Kings,  title  of  Christ,  2 


Language,  analogical, 2 

figurative, - 

Law,  moral,  subject  of  revela- 
tion     1 

Liberty,  right  to, 3 


Life,  right  to,. 


what, 1 

Liturgies 3 

Logos,  whence  derived, 2 

Lord,  a  title  of  Christ, - 

Lord's  day 3 

Lord's  Supper,  a  sacrament,. .  - 
different  views  of,  - 

nature  of, - 

obligatory - 

Love  of  God,  duty  of, - 

nature  of, - 

philosophic     and 
Christian,  .  .  . .   - 


350 
27 


347 
348 

10 
271 
282 
270 
275 
384 
241 

74 
6 
247 
423 
417 
417 
416 
217 
218 

219 


434 


Vol.  Page. 

M 

Magianism 1  42 

Mohammed,  success  of, -  255 

Man,  fallen  state  of, -  225 

fall  of, 2  159 

liberty  of, 1  478 

primitive  state  of, 2  164 

why  created, -  176 

moral  freedom  of, -  191 

effects  of  his  fall, -  205 

his  own  fault  if  not  saved,  3  7 

Marriage -  286 

ends  of, -  286 

both  a  civil  and  reli- 
gious contract 3  289 

Masters,  duties  of, 3  299 

Memra,  title  of  Christ 2  72 

Merits  of  Christ -  210 

Men,  duty  of  all,  to  believe  the 

Gospel, 3  6 

Mercy,  works  of, 3  268 

Miracles,  definition  of, 1  78 

possible -  79 

their     authenticating 

character -  80 

credible -  84 

office  of, -  97 

of  Scripture -  158 

objectionsto,answered  -  169 

pretended, 183 

Moral  virtue,  ground  on  which 

Christianity  places  it,  3  216 

agency 1  5 

obligation -  72 

3  212 

government 2  160 

principles  of,  -  257 

law 3  203 

established    by    the 

Gospel -  204 

philosophy -  208 

use  of, -  210 

precepts,  reasons  of,. ...   -  210 

rules,  exceptions  to, . ...   -  211 

sense -  212 

Murder,  what, -  277 

self, -  275 

Mysteries 1  264 

N 

Nature,  human,  corruption  of,  2  225 

Neighbours,  duties  to, 3  265 

O 

Obligation,  what 3  214 

Objections    to   the    Scriptures 

answered 1  259 

Omnipotenee,attribute  of  Christ  2  95 

Omnipresence -  87 

Omniscience -  90 

Oracles,  heathen.. 1  180 

189 


Vul.  Pagg 
Ordination  of  Presbyters  from 

the  Jews 3  325 

Origin  of  Archbishops -  326 

Primates -  326 

Original  sin 2  205 

P 

Pardon  ofsinnotbyprerogative  2  265 

399 

Parents 3  296 

Parishes,  primitive, -  326 

Pastors,  office  of, -  320 

334 

authority  of, -  337 

Patriarchs,  faith  of, 2  367 

rise  of, 3  326 

Penance, ancient, -  353 

Person,  what, 1  500 

Pharaoh,  case  of, 3  37 

Philosophical  objections  to  Mo- 
saic account  of  creation  and 

deluge 1  272 

Political  justice 3  304 

Polygamy -  287 

Potestas,  SoypaTtKv, -  344 

iiaraKTiKr], -  347 

SiaKpiTiKri, -  349 

Potter,  power  of,  over  the  clay.  -  42 

Power,  origin  of, -  304 

Praise,  duty  of, -  246 

Prayer,  efficacy  of,  upon  others  -  231 

ejaculatory, -  232 

enjoined -  224 

family, -  233 

forms  of, -  241 

consistent  with  Divine 

wisdom, -  230 

objections  to, -  228 

private, -  233 

public, -  238 

reason  of, -  225 

right  of -  190 

what, -  224 

whether   it  has  moral 

influence, -  226 

whether  opposedto  pre- 
destination,    -  228 

Precepts,   general    application 

of, -  211 

moral  and  positive,.. .  2  196 

Pre-damnation 3  120 

Predestination,  what -  84 

origin  of, -  117 

Presbyters,  office  of, -  321 

of  same   order   as 

Bishops -  323 

328 

Pretention -  120 

Primates,  origin  of, -  326 

Property,  right  of, -  271 

"  280 

Prophecy 1  92 

double  sense  of, -  196 

objections  to  evidence  of,  -  21 1 

scriptural -  191 


iiio 


v  ol.  Page. 

lJropiiets,  taise, 1     215 

office  of, 3     320 

Propitiation,  what, 2    286 

Q 
Quality  of  actions 1        5 

R 

Reason,  weakness  of, 1       16 

74 
use  and  limitation  of,  -      102 
Reasons  on  which  moral  pre- 
cepts rest 3    210 

Reconciliation,  what, 2    290 

Rectitude,  what, 3     214 

Redemption 2    257 

297 

free -     302 

illustration  of  God's 

righteousness. ...  2     307 

Regeneration,  what, -     444 

459 

Religion,  natural, 1      20 

corruption  of,  among 

heathen  nations.. ..  -       45 

Repentance 2    267 

not  regeneration. .   -     460 
Reprobation,  absolute,  contrary 

to  the  Divine  attributes 3       64 

Resurrection  of  the  body -     194 

199 

Reverence  of  God 3    222 

Revelation,  characters  of  a, ...  1       66 

evidences  of, -       73 

necessary -       10 

46 
58 
63 

Revolution  of  1688 3    315 

Righteousness,  imputed,  doc- 
trine of,  considered  2    401 
Arminius's  opinion . .  -     410 
Calvin's  view  of, ... .  -     408 
Mr.  Wesley's  view  of,  -     411 

Rights,  natural, 3    270 

of  conscience -     282 

of  liberty -     271 

281 

of  life -     270 

275 

of  property -     271 

280 

S 

Sabbath,  obligation  of, 3  247 

observance  of, -  261 

recreations  upon, ...  -  264 

Sabellianism 2  14^ 

Sacraments,  number  of, 3  355 

different   views  of 

their  nature, -  358 

of  baptism -  363 

of  Lord's  Supper ..  -  415 

seals -  361 

sisrns -  361 


Vol.  Page. 

Sacrament    what, 3  356 

Sacrifices 2  326 

a  patriarchial  rite 350 

354 

Divine  appointment  of,  -  383 

expiatory, -  328 

human, 1  63 

of  Abel 2  354 

of  the  law, -  330 

primitive, -  351 

types -  338 

Sanctification 3  183 

Satisfaction,  opinions  concern- 
ing,   2  313 

Scientia  Media 3  162 

Scotland,  Church  of.  Calvinistic  -  138 

Scriptures,  antiquity  of, 1  113 

credibility  of, -  153 

genuineness  of, 119 

testimonies  to,  -  132 

harmony  of, -  245 

manner  of, -  253 

moral  tendency  of, .  -  246 

preservation  of, 144 

style  of, , -  252 

Serpent  the  devil 2  199 

Servants,  duties  of, 3  299 

Sin  a  debt,  how, 2  304 

impulsive  cause  of  Christ's 

sufferings -  281 

imputation  of, -  216 

original, -  159 

in  what  it  consists,  -  244 

Slavery 3  271 

African, -  273 

among  the  Hebrews ...  -  272 

in  Christian  States -  273 

Slaves,  duties  of  Christian  go- 
vernments respecting, -  273 

Son  of  God,  title  of  Christ, ....  2  28 

Son,  only-begotten, -  45 

Soul,  traduction  of, -  249 

Sovereign,  duties  of, ) 3  307 

Sovereignty  of  God -  174 

Space 1  371 

State,  intermediate, 3  191 

Subjects,  duties  of, -  304 

308 

Sublapsarianism -  121 

Submission  to  God -  216 

Suicide -  275 

Supralapsarianism  ...'. -  119 

Synagogues,  rulers  of, -  324 

modes  of  worship  in,  -  324 

T 

Thanksgiving,  duty  of, 3  246 

Traditions  of  the  Heathen 1  38 

Trinity -  49S 

importance  of  the  doctrine,  -  503 

proofs  of,  from  Scripture,..  -  519 

Trust  in  God 3  220 

friendship  with  God, 

necessary  to, -  221 


436 


Vol.  Page. 
Truth,  origin  of,  among  the 

Heathen 1  27 

Types ■  197 

U 

Unity  of  the  Church 3  332 

Universal  charity,  source  of,  . .  -  265 
active  expres- 
sion of -  267 


Vaudois,  opinions  of,  on  pre- 
destination    3  137 

Virtue,  what 3  214 

Virtues  in  the  unregenerate  .  .  2  250 


W 


Vol.  Page. 


Westminster  Confession 3 

Wife,  duties  of, - 

Will,  freedom  of, - 


of  God,  source  of  moral 

obligation - 

Word,  title  of  Christ 2 

World,  the  extent  of  the  term,  3 
Worship,  supreme  and  inferior  2 

ends  of, 3 

family, - 

public, , - 


138 

286 

291 

24 

167 

213 
16 

67 
8 
121 
239 
233 
238 


THE   END. 


Date  Due 

'***"**'*•*— Wire* 

MAR  2  5  '8J 

1 

jHiTWWWB^W^ 

MAYS    ^ 

P^-rt^ 

f> 

PRINTED 

IN  tJ.  S.  A. 

